An Information-Theoretic View of Array Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The removal of noise and interference from an array of received signals is a most fundamental problem in signal processing research. To date, many well-known solutions based on second-order statistics (SOS) have been proposed. This paper views the signal enhancement problem as one of maximizing the mutual information between the source signal and array output. It is shown that if the signal and noise are Gaussian, the maximum mutual information estimation (MMIE) solution is not unique but consists of an infinite set of solutions which encompass the SOS-based optimal filters. The application of the MMIE principle to Laplacian signals is then examined by considering the important problem of estimating a speech signal from a set of noisy observations. It is revealed that while speech (well modeled by a Laplacian distribution) possesses higher order statistics (HOS), the well-known SOS-based optimal filters maximize the Laplacian mutual information as well; that is, the Laplacian mutual information differs from the Gaussian mutual information by a single term whose dependence on the beamforming weights is negligible. Simulation results verify these findings.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".