MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143972262 · doi:10.1117/12.406502

<title>Nonlinear signal processing using index calculus DBNS arithmetic</title>

2000· article· en· W2143972262 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberto Muscedere, G.A. Jullien, Vassil S. Dimitrov, William C. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSignal processingRepresentation (politics)Digital signal processingDynamic rangeRange (aeronautics)ArithmeticBinary numberAlgorithmSpeech processingSpeech recognitionMathematicsComputer hardwareComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the use of a recently introduced index calculus Double-Base Number System (IDBNS) for representing and processing numbers for non-linear digital signal processing; the target application is a digital hearing aid processor. The IDBNS representation uses 2 orthogonal bases (2 and 3) to represent real numbers with arbitrary precision. By restricting the number of digits to one or two, It is possible to efficiently represent the real number using the indices of the bases rather than the distribution of the digits. In this paper we discuss the use of the two-digit form of this representation (2-IDBNS) to efficiently perform arithmetic associated with the non-linear processing required to correct the usual forms of hearing loss in a digital hearing aid. The non-linear processing takes the form of dynamic range compression as a function of frequency band. Currently developed digital hearing instrument processors require large dynamic range representations (20 - 24 bits) in order to accurately generate the dynamic range compression associated with typical hearing loss. We show that the natural non-linear representation afforded by the IDBNS provides both a more efficient signal representation and a more efficient technique for processing the dynamic range compression. We pay particular attention to a novel technique of converting from a linear binary input directly to the 2-IDBNS representation using an observation of partial cyclic repetition in the indices along with near unity approximants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.009

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicNumerical Methods and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207