MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899296455 · doi:10.1109/compem.2018.8496459

A Comparison Between Fast Fourier Transform and Matrix Pencil Method for Spectral Integration Calculation

2018· article· en· W2899296455 on OpenAlexaff
Xinzhi Lil, Huapeng Zhao, Zhizhang Chen, Jun Hu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Compatibility and Measurements
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFast Fourier transformMatrix pencilComputer scienceFourier transformAlgorithmTransformation matrixPrime-factor FFT algorithmMatrix (chemical analysis)Pencil (optics)Transformation (genetics)Split-radix FFT algorithmPhase correlationComputational scienceMathematicsPhysicsOpticsShort-time Fourier transformFourier analysisMaterials scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spectral integration is a critical step in the near field to far field transformation. The calculation of spectral integration is usually implemented by using Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). FFT is efficient, but it often can not calculate the phase of the plane wave spectrum accurately. In order to achieve accurate phase calculation, this paper proposes to calculate the spectral integration by using the Matrix Pencil Method (MPM). Simulations are performed to compare the efficiency and accuracy of MPM and FFT. It is found that MPM significantly improves the accuracy with acceptable CPU time consumption.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Compatibility and MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207