MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989473457 · doi:10.1109/tim.2006.876537

Fast System Identification Using Affine Projection and a Critically Sampled Subband Adaptive Filter

2006· article· en· W2989473457 on OpenAlexaff
J.D. Gordy, Rafik Goubran

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive filterFilter bankFinite impulse responseLeast mean squares filterAlgorithmImpulse responseComputer scienceFilter (signal processing)MathematicsSpeech recognitionComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the use of a subband affine projection (AP) algorithm for solving system identification problems using critically sampled subband adaptive filters. The subband AP is first analyzed with respect to theoretical rate of convergence and computational complexity. Simulation results for the algorithm are presented in the context of measuring a room impulse response for acoustic echo cancellation and tracking changes to the impulse response over time. In these simulations, the subband AP is compared to other subband adaptation algorithms using two-, four-, and eight-channel filter banks and to fullband adaptation algorithms. To evaluate the algorithm in a practical implementation, experimental results are presented for echo cancellation using speech input signals in a conference room. It is shown that a four-channel filter bank with subband AP can achieve an average mean square error that is 5 dB lower than a subband normalized least-mean-square algorithm during initial filter convergence

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207