MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755153992 · doi:10.1109/mcs.2017.2718830

Unbiased Finite Impluse Response Filtering: An Iterative Alternative to Kalman Filtering Ignoring Noise and Initial Conditions

2017· article· en· W2755153992 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Control Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfinite impulse responseKalman filterControl theory (sociology)EstimatorRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceGaussian noiseWhite noiseNoise (video)Finite impulse responseImpulse noiseNoise measurementAlgorithmLinear filterMathematicsStatisticsFilter (signal processing)Digital filterArtificial intelligenceNoise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If a system and its observation are both represented in state space with linear equations, the system noise and the measurement noise are white, Gaussian, and mutually uncorrelated, and the system and measurement noise statistics are known exactly; then, a Kalman filter (KF) [1] with the same order as the system provides optimal state estimates in a way that is simple and fast and uses little memory. Because such estimators are of interest for designers, numerous linear and nonlinear problems have been solved using the KF, and many articles about KF applications appear every year. However, the KF is an infinite impulse response (IIR) filter [2]. Therefore, the KF performance may be poor if operational conditions are far from ideal [3]. Researchers working in the field of statistical signal processing and control are aware of the numerous issues facing the use of the KF in practice: insufficient robustness against mismodeling [4] and temporary uncertainties [2], the strong effect of the initial values [1], and high vulnerability to errors in the noise statistics [5]-[7].

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 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

Citations201
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Control SystemsSame topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207