Separable Approximation for Solving the Sensor Subset Selection Problem
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An algorithm is proposed to solve the sensor subset selection problem. In this problem, a prespecified number of sensors are selected to estimate the value of a parameter such that a metric of estimation accuracy is maximized. The metric is defined as the determinant of the Bayesian Fisher information matrix (B-FIM). It is shown that the metric can be expanded as a homogenous polynomial of decision variables. In the algorithm, a separable approximation of the polynomial is derived based on a graph-theoretic clustering method. To this end, a graph is constructed where the vertices represent the sensors, and the weights on the edges represent the coefficients of the terms in the polynomial. A process known as natural selection in population genetics is utilized to find the dominant sets of the graph. Each dominant set is considered as one cluster. When the separable approximation is obtained, the sensor selection problem is solved by dynamic programming. Numerical results are provided in the context of localization via direction-of-arrival (DOA) measurements to evaluate the performance of the 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it