MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080930724 · doi:10.1063/5.0015350

Compressed sensing based tuning algorithm for the sensor of proton precession magnetometers

2020· article· en· W3080930724 on OpenAlexaff
Hengli Song, Huan Liu, Haobin Dong, Zheng Liu, Jian Ge, Zhiwen Yuan, Jun Zhu, Xinqun Luan

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMagnetometerCompressed sensingPrecessionProtonNuclear magnetic resonanceComputer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsMaterials scienceMagnetic fieldCondensed matter physicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Note, a new compressed sensing-based tuning algorithm has been developed to boost the sensor tuning performance of the proton precession magnetometers (PPMs). An end-to-end framework for the PPM's sensing free induction decay (FID) signal resonance based on orthogonal matching pursuit compressed sensing (OMPCS), dubbed OMPCS-FID resonance (OMPCS-FIDR), is developed and its working principle and implemented strategy are elaborated. By comparing the new sensor tuning approach with the state-of-the-art algorithms, i.e., peak detection, auto-correction, and secondary tuning, the results demonstrate that the proposed tuning method not only retains the performance but also overcomes the drawbacks of the state-of-the-art methods, which accelerates the possibilities of the PPM working in a scenario with a strong gradient magnetic field.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207