MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092331698 · doi:10.1103/physreve.70.051110

Soft threshold stochastic resonance

2004· article· en· W2092331698 on OpenAlexaff
Priscilla E. Greenwood, Ursula U. Müller, Lawrence M. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
Topicstochastic dynamics and bifurcation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic resonanceFisher informationMeasure (data warehouse)Information transmissionSIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceNoise (video)Threshold modelInformation theoryTransmission (telecommunications)Statistical physicsResonance (particle physics)MathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsData miningMachine learningTelecommunicationsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soft thresholds are ubiquitous in living organisms, in particular in mechanisms of neurons and of neural networks such as sensory systems. Which soft threshold functions produce (threshold) stochastic resonance remains a question. The answer may depend on the information measure used. We argue that Fisher information about signal parameters is an attractive measure of information transmission across soft thresholds. We illustrate how the pattern of information changes as a signal moves across a soft threshold. For some signals this pattern is much the same whether Fisher information or signal-to-noise ratio is used as a measure of information transmission. Noninvertibility of the threshold function, rather than its steepness, is important for stochastic resonance measured by Fisher information.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicstochastic dynamics and bifurcationFrench-language works237,207