Oversampled Filter Banks with instantaneous erasures
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
Oversampled Filter Banks (OFB) can be used for erasure correction due to the redundancy that they insert into the signal. People have studied erasures using a frame-theoretic approach in which erasure is defined as the deletion of the frame expansion coefficients corresponding to a frame element. This approach applies to OFBs and results in an erasure being interpreted as losing all samples in a sub-band. However, a more realistic and flexible scenario is when an erasure is considered as the loss of sub-band samples only for particular time instances. Alternatively in an erasure-free channel, analogous to the concept of puncturing, the sub-band samples might be erased deliberately to change the code rate. In both of these scenarios, the erasure pattern of sub-bands can differ for different time instances. In this paper, we investigate this situation and derive a set of sufficient conditions that should be satisfied by the OFB in order to reconstruct the output. Simulation results will be presented for substantiating the proposed OFB structure which show the efficiency of this method in increasing the resilience of OFB against erasures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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