MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901078087 · doi:10.1109/iccce.2018.8539329

Boolean Compressive Sensing: An Approximate Trust Region Reconstruction

2018· article· en· W2901078087 on OpenAlexaff
Sofiane Hachemi, Daniel Massicotte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceNonlinear systemBoolean algebraComputer scienceCompressed sensingOptimization problemMathematical optimizationTrust regionAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a direct nonlinear optimization method to solve the Boolean Compressive Sensing (BCS) problem for large signals when sparsity level is unknown. While traditional CS results from linear Algebra, BCS, is given by logical operation in the Boolean workspace. To overcome this inconvenience, we relax the problem in an equivalent formulation in the Real workspace using appropriate modeling as a first step. Thereafter we turn out the problem in an unconstrained form that can be solved directly by nonlinear optimization method called Trust Region methods (TRM). Our solution is based on an Approximate version of (TRM). Numerical results are presented to sustain efficiency of our proposal.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207