MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167754229 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2010.5575147

A spatio-temporal stacking approach for estimating two-dimensional direction-of-arrival

2010· article· en· W2167754229 on OpenAlexaff
Jian-Feng Gu, Wei‐Ping Zhu, M.N.S. Swamy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzimuthStackingComputer scienceAlgorithmSingular value decompositionBlock matrixDirection of arrivalMatrix (chemical analysis)Block (permutation group theory)Matching (statistics)Face (sociological concept)MathematicsTelecommunicationsGeometryStatisticsAntenna (radio)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of 2-D DOA estimation techniques based on L-shaped array have received much attention. In general, these methods require division of the L-shaped array into two independent uniform linear array (ULA) to obtain the azimuth and elevation angles independently, and then use additional pair matching technique to achieve 2-D DOA estimation. Therefore, these methods have some drawbacks such as 1) requirement of pair matching which may increase the computational burden significantly and 2) estimating the azimuth and elevation angles by independently using each ULA half of the L-shaped array. The purpose of this paper is to develop a spatio-temporal stacking approach (STSA) to deal with these shortcomings. The STSA method first partitions the many lag cross-correlation matrices into a lot of submatrices based on the assumption on the second-order temporal structure (SOTS) of the source signals, and then stacks these submatrices according to some special structure to form a spatio-temporal stacking matrix. Finally, the joint singular value decomposition (JSVD) technique is exploited to extract out the 2-D DOAs one by one.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207