MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126010864 · doi:10.1145/1390156.1390215

ICA and ISA using Schweizer-Wolff measure of dependence

2008· article· en· W2126010864 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
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependent component analysisPairwise comparisonSubspace topologyOutlierMeasure (data warehouse)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Parametric statisticsNoise (video)Artificial intelligencePairwise independenceContrast (vision)AlgorithmMathematicsImage (mathematics)Data miningStatisticsRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new algorithm for independent component and independent subspace analysis problems. This algorithm uses a contrast based on the Schweizer-Wolff measure of pairwise dependence (Schweizer & Wolff, 1981), a non-parametric measure computed on pairwise ranks of the variables. Our algorithm frequently outperforms state of the art ICA methods in the normal setting, is significantly more robust to outliers in the mixed signals, and performs well even in the presence of noise. Our method can also be used to solve independent subspace analysis (ISA) problems by grouping signals recovered by ICA methods. We provide an extensive empirical evaluation using simulated, sound, and image data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207