Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma, Linear and Nonlinear Random Projections, Random Fourier Features, and Random Kitchen Sinks: Tutorial and Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a tutorial and survey paper on the Johnson-Lindenstrauss (JL) lemma and linear and nonlinear random projections. We start with linear random projection and then justify its correctness by JL lemma and its proof. Then, sparse random projections with $\ell_1$ norm and interpolation norm are introduced. Two main applications of random projection, which are low-rank matrix approximation and approximate nearest neighbor search by random projection onto hypercube, are explained. Random Fourier Features (RFF) and Random Kitchen Sinks (RKS) are explained as methods for nonlinear random projection. Some other methods for nonlinear random projection, including extreme learning machine, randomly weighted neural networks, and ensemble of random projections, are also introduced.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it