MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132315948 · doi:10.1049/iet-spr.2013.0354

Time–frequency‐based instantaneous frequency estimation of sparse signals from incomplete set of samples

2014· article· en· W2132315948 on OpenAlexaff
Irena Orović, Srdjan Stanković, T. Thayaparan

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Signal Processing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime–frequency analysisAlgorithmSIGNAL (programming language)MathematicsInstantaneous phaseSignal reconstructionBilinear interpolationFourier transformSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceSpectral density estimationPattern recognition (psychology)Signal processingArtificial intelligenceStatisticsDigital signal processingTelecommunicationsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The estimation of time‐varying instantaneous frequency (IF) for monocomponent signals with an incomplete set of samples is considered. A suitable time–frequency distribution (TFD) reduces the non‐stationary signal into a local sinusoid over the lag variable prior to the Fourier transform. Accordingly, the observed spectral content becomes sparse and suitable for compressive sensing reconstruction in the case of missing samples. Although the local bilinear or higher order auto‐correlation functions will increase the number of the missing samples, the analysis shows that an accurate IF estimation can be achieved even if we deal with only few samples, as long as the auto‐correlation function is properly chosen to coincide with the signals phase non‐linearity. In addition, by employing the sparse signal reconstruction algorithms, ideal time–frequency representations are obtained. The presented theory is illustrated on several examples dealing with different auto‐correlation functions and corresponding TFDs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Signal ProcessingSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207