Similarity search over time-series data using wavelets
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
Considers the use of wavelet transformations as a dimensionality reduction technique to permit efficient similarity searching over high-dimensional time-series data. While numerous transformations have been proposed and studied, the only wavelet that has been shown to be effective for this application is the Haar wavelet. In this work, we observe that a large class of wavelet transformations (not only orthonormal wavelets but also bi-orthonormal wavelets) can be used to support similarity searching. This class includes the most popular and most effective wavelets being used in image compression. We present a detailed performance study of the effects of using different wavelets on the performance of similarity searching for time-series data. We include several wavelets that outperform both the Haar wavelet and the best-known non-wavelet transformations for this application. To ensure our results are usable by an application engineer, we also show how to configure an indexing strategy for the best-performing transformations. Finally, we identify classes of data that can be indexed efficiently using these wavelet transformations.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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