Partitioning in signal processing using the object migration automaton and the pursuit paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data in all Signal Processing (SP) applications is being generated super-exponentially, and at an ever increasing rate. A meaningful way to pre-process it so as to achieve feasible computation is by Partitioning the data [5]. Indeed, the task of partitioning is one of the most difficult problems in computing, and it has extensive applications in solving real-life problems, especially when the amount of SP data (i.e., images, voices, speakers, libraries etc.) to be processed is prohibitively large. The problem is known to be NP-hard. The benchmark solution for this for the Equi-partitioning Problem (EPP) has involved the classic field of Learning Automata (LA), and the corresponding algorithm, the Object Migrating Automata (OMA) has been used in numerous application domains. While the OMA is a fixed structure machine, it does not incorporate the Pursuit concept that has, recently, significantly enhanced the field of LA. In this paper, we pioneer the incorporation of the Pursuit concept into the OMA. We do this by a non-intuitive paradigm, namely that of removing (or discarding) from the query stream, queries that could be counter-productive. This can be perceived as a filtering agent triggered by a pursuit-based module. The resulting machine, referred to as the Pursuit OMA (POMA), has been rigorously tested in all the standard benchmark environments. Indeed, in certain extreme environments it is almost ten times faster than the original OMA. The application of the POMA to all signal processing applications is extremely promising.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".