MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094065427 · doi:10.1109/tsp.2022.3178191

Polar Deconvolution of Mixed Signals

2022· article· en· W3094065427 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhenan Fan, Halyun Jeong, Babhru Joshi, Michael P. Friedlander

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeconvolutionAlgorithmSublinear functionMathematical optimizationSuperposition principleMathematicsProbabilistic logicConvex optimizationConvolution (computer science)Computational complexity theoryNoise (video)Computer scienceBounded functionSmoothingApplied mathematicsRegular polygonArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The signal demixing problem seeks to separate a superposition of multiple signals into its constituent components. This paper studies a two-stage approach that first decompresses and subsequently deconvolves the noisy and undersampled observations of the superposition using two convex programs. Probabilistic error bounds are given on the accuracy with which this process approximates the individual signals. The theory of polar convolution of convex sets and gauge functions plays a central role in the analysis and solution process. If the measurements are random and the noise is bounded, this approach stably recovers low-complexity and mutually incoherent signals, with high probability and with near-optimal sample complexity. We develop an efficient algorithm, based on level-set and conditional-gradient methods, that solves the convex optimization problems with sublinear iteration complexity and linear space requirements. Numerical experiments on both real and synthetic data confirm the theory and the efficiency of the approach.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Signal ProcessingSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207