MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188875596 · doi:10.1155/2021/9933078

Comparative Application of Time‐Frequency Methods on Strong Motion Signals

2021· article· en· W3188875596 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarthquake Detection and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHilbert–Huang transformHarmonic wavelet transformFourier transformShort-time Fourier transformTime–frequency analysisWaveletConstant Q transformWavelet transformFractional Fourier transformComputer scienceMathematicsContinuous wavelet transformAlgorithmDiscrete wavelet transformFilter (signal processing)Fourier analysisMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real‐world physical signals are commonly nonstationary, and their frequency details change with time and do not remain constant. Fourier transform that uses infinite sine/cosine waves as basis functions represents frequency constituents of signals but does not show the variations of the signal frequency contents over time. Multiresolution demonstration of the time‐frequency domain may be achieved by the techniques that can support adjustable resolution in time and frequency. Earthquake strong motion signals are nonstationary and indicate time‐varying frequency content due to the scattering from the source to the site. In this paper, we applied short‐time Fourier transform, S‐transform, continuous wavelet transform, fast discrete wavelet transform, synchrosqueezing transform, synchroextracting transform, continuous wavelet synchrosqueezing, filter bank synchrosqueezing, empirical mode decomposition, and Fourier decomposition methods on the near‐source strong motion signals from the 7 May 2020 Mosha‐Iran earthquake to study and compare the frequency content of this event estimated by these methods. According to the results that are examined by Renyi entropy and relative error, synchroextracting performed better in terms of energy concentration, and the Fourier decomposition method revealed the lowest difference between the original and reconstructed records.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.272 · 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