Superdirective Beamforming Based on the Krylov Matrix
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Superdirective beamforming has attracted a significant amount of research interest in speech and audio applications, since it can maximize the directivity factor (DF) given an array geometry and, therefore, is efficient in dealing with signal acquisition in diffuse-like noise environments. However, this beamformer is very sensitive to sensor self-noise and mismatch among sensors, which considerably restricts its use in practical systems. This paper develops an approach to superdirective beamforming based on the Krylov matrix. We show that the columns of a proposed Krylov matrix, which span a chosen dimension of the whole space, are interesting beamformers; consequently, all different linear combinations of those columns lead to beamformers that have good properties. In particular, we develop the Krylov maximum white noise gain and Krylov maximum DF beamformers, which are obtained by maximizing the WNG and the DF, respectively. By properly choosing the dimension of the Krylov subspace, the developed beamformers that can make a compromise between reasonable values of the DF and white noise amplification. We also extend the basic idea to the design of the Krylov maximum front-to-back ratio, parametric superdirective, and parametric supercardioid beamformers.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".