A Genetic Algorithm Employing Correlative Roulette Selection for Optimization of FRM Digital Filters over CSD Multiplier Coefficient Space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well known that canonical signed digit (CSD) multiplier coefficients reduce the complexity and power consumption requirements in the hardware implementation of FIR digital filters. Optimization of the constituent CSD multiplier coefficients using genetic algorithms can further reduce this complexity by constantly evolving from generation to generation based on the minimization of an objective fitness function modeled on the magnitude response characteristics of the digital filter. This paper presents a new genetic algorithm based on correlative roulette selection (CRS) for the optimization of frequency response-masking (FRM) FIR digital filters over the CSD multiplier coefficient space. Based on genetic operations such as crossover and mutation, valid CSD multiplier coefficients are generated without any recourse to gene repair. An application example is given for the design of a FRM FIR lowpass digital filter employing CSD multiplier coefficients. The resulting FIR digital filter outperforms a corresponding infinite-precision digital filter obtained by using the Parks-McClellan technique
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".