MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120927355 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2005.1416259

Arithmetic Complexity of the Split-Radix FFT Algorithms

2006· article· en· W2120927355 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Filter Design and Implementation
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFast Fourier transformSplit-radix FFT algorithmTwiddle factorRadix (gastropod)Prime-factor FFT algorithmRader's FFT algorithmArithmeticAlgorithmCooley–Tukey FFT algorithmComputer scienceMathematicsFourier transformFourier analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A radix-2/16 decimation-in-frequency (DIF) fast Fourier transform (FFT) algorithm and its higher radix version, namely radix-4/16 DIF FFT algorithm, are proposed by suitably mixing the radix-2, radix-4 and radix-16 index maps, and combing some of the twiddle factors. It is shown that the proposed algorithms and the existing radix-2/4 and radix-2/8 FFT algorithms require exactly the same number of arithmetic operations (multiplications+additions). Moreover, by using techniques similar to these, it can be shown that all the possible split-radix FFT algorithms of the type radix-2/sup r//2/sup rs/ for computing a 2/sup m/-point DFT require exactly the same number of arithmetic operations.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Filter Design and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207