MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337742813

Towards an Algorithmic Theory of Compressed Sensing

2005· article· en· W2337742813 on OpenAlexaff
Graham Cormode, S. Muthukrishnan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingOrthonormal basisSignal reconstructionSIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceClass (philosophy)Series (stratigraphy)AlgorithmPerspective (graphical)Signal processingBasis (linear algebra)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Approximation Theory, the fundamental problem is to reconstruct a signal A ∈ Rn from linear measurements 〈A, ψi 〉 with respect to a dictionary Ψ for Rn. Recently, there has been tremendous excitement about the novel direction of Compressed Sensing [10] where the reconstruction can be done with very few — Õ(k)—linear measurements over a modified dictionary Ψ ′ if the information of the signal is concentrated in k coefficients over an orthonormal basis Ψ. These results have reconstruction error on any given signal that is optimal with respect to a broad class of signals. In a series of papers and meetings over the past year, a theory of Compressed Sensing has been developed by mathematicians. We develop an algorithmic perspective for the Compressed Sensing problem, showing that Compressed Sensing results resonate with prior work in Group Testing, Learning theory and Streaming algorithms. Our main contributions are new algorithms that present the most general results for Compressed Sensing with 1 + ɛ approximation on every signal, faster The dictionary Ψ denotes an orthonormal basis for Rn, i.e. Ψ is a set of n real-valued vectors

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations33
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207