Density Evolution Analysis of Node-Based Verification-Based Algorithms in Compressed Sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a new approach for the analysis of iterative node-based verification-based (NB-VB) recovery algorithms in the context of compressed sensing. These algorithms are particularly interesting due to their low complexity (linear in the signal dimensionn). The asymptotic analysis predicts the fraction of unverified signal elements at each iterationlin the asymptotic regime wheren→∞. The analysis is similar in nature to the well-known density evolution technique commonly used to analyze iterative decoding algorithms. To perform the analysis, a message-passing interpretation of NB-VB algorithms is provided. This interpretation lacks the extrinsic nature of standard message-passing algorithms to which density evolution is usually applied. This requires a number of nontrivial modifications in the analysis. The analysis tracks the average performance of the recovery algorithms over the ensembles of input signals and sensing matrices as a function ofl. Concentration results are devised to demonstrate that the performance of the recovery algorithms applied to any choice of the input signal over any realization of the sensing matrix follows the deterministic results of the analysis closely. Simulation results are also provided which demonstrate that the proposed asymptotic analysis matches the performance of recovery algorithms for large but finite values ofn. Compared to the existing technique for the analysis of NB-VB algorithms, which is based on numerically solving a large system of coupled differential equations, the proposed method is more accurate and simpler to implement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".