MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964266252 · doi:10.1109/lsp.2015.2409896

Cramer-Rao Bound for Sparse Signals Fitting the Low-Rank Model with Small Number of Parameters

2015· article· en· W2964266252 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Shaghaghi, Sergiy A. Vorobyov

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorRank (graph theory)Cramér–Rao boundCompressed sensingAlgorithmCovarianceUpper and lower boundsMathematicsCovariance matrixEstimation theoryDirection of arrivalRepresentation (politics)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsStatisticsCombinatoricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider signals with a low-rank covariance matrix which reside in a low-dimensional subspace and can be written in terms of a finite (small) number of parameters. Although such signals do not necessarily have a sparse representation in a finite basis, they possess a sparse structure which makes it possible to recover the signal from compressed measurements. We study the statistical performance bound for parameter estimation in the low-rank signal model from compressed measurements. Specifically, we derive the Cramer-Rao bound (CRB) for a generic low-rank model and we show that the number of compressed samples needs to be larger than the number of sources for the existence of an unbiased estimator with finite estimation variance. We further consider the applications to direction-of-arrival (DOA) and spectral estimation which fit into the low-rank signal model. We also investigate the effect of compression on the CRB by considering numerical examples of the DOA estimation scenario, and show how the CRB increases by increasing the compression or equivalently reducing the number of compressed samples.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.078 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207