MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903103184 · doi:10.23919/eusipco.2018.8553367

Iterative Reconstruction of Spectrally Sparse Signals from Level Crossings

2018· article· en· W2903103184 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Boloursaz Mashhadi, Hadi Zayyani, Saeed Gazor, Farokh Marvasti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSignal reconstructionCompressed sensingAlgorithmA priori and a posterioriIterative reconstructionComputer scienceIterative methodThresholdingBinary numberSparse matrixSIGNAL (programming language)Signal processingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the problem of sparse signal reconstruction from the timing of its Level Crossings (LC)s. We formulate the sparse Zero Crossing (ZC) reconstruction problem in terms of a single L-blt Compressive Sensing (CS) model. We also extend the Smoothed LO (SLO) sparse reconstruction algorithm to the I-bit CS framework and propose the Binary SLO (BSLO) algorithm for iterative reconstruction of the sparse signal from ZCs in cases where the number of sparse coefficients is not known to the reconstruction algorithm a priori. Similar to the ZC case, we propose a system of simultaneously constrained signed-CS problems to reconstruct a sparse signal from its Level Crossings (LC)s and modify both the Binary Iterative Hard Thresholding (BIHT) and BSLO algorithms to solve this problem. Simulation results demonstrate superior performance of the proposed LC reconstruction techniques in comparison with the literature.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207