MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092445605 · doi:10.1145/569147.569151

Algorithm 820

2002· article· en· W2092445605 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Mathematical Software · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceImplementationAlgorithmSignal processingWaveformContext (archaeology)SIGNAL (programming language)Fast Fourier transformSuperposition principleDigital signal processingMathematicsComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In digital signal processing it is often advantageous to analyze a given signal using an adaptive method. The signal is approximated or represented as a superposition of "basic" waveforms chosen from a dictionary of such waveforms so as to best match the signal. The matching pursuit algorithm of Mallat and Zhang is such a method and is discussed in the context of discretized Gabor functions on an interval. We describe two software implementations based on these dictionaries. Both implementations rely on functions defined on an interval to avoid edge effects. One implementation allows for users to have great flexibility in the Gabor dictionary to be used. This is a useful improvement over other implementations, which only allow for a fixed dictionary. The other implementation takes advantage of the FFT algorithm and is faster. These implementations are written in C++, and can be used in practical applications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.236 · 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