Signal recovery method for compressive sensing using relaxation and second-order cone programming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A signal recovery method for compressive sensing under noisy measurements is proposed. The problem is formulated as a nonconvex nonsmooth constrained optimization problem that uses the smoothly clipped absolute deviation (SCAD) function to promote sparsity. Relaxation is employed by means of a series of local linear approximations (LLAs) of the SCAD in a constrained formulation. The relaxation is shown to converge to a minimum of the original nonconvex constrained optimization problem. In order to solve each nonsmooth convex relaxation problem, a second-order cone programming (SOCP) formulation is used, which can be applied by using standard state-of-the-art SOCP solvers such as SeDuMi. Experimental results demonstrate that signals recovered using the proposed method exhibit reduced ℓ∞reconstruction error when compared with competing methods such as ℓ1-Magic. Simulations demonstrate that significant reduction in the reconstruction error can be achieved with computational cost that is comparable to that required by the ℓ1-Magic algorithm.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".