MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Photonics-Based Cholesky Decomposition

2021· article· en· W3204848816 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Salmani, Enxiao Luan, Sreenil Saha, Behrooz Semnani, Armaghan Eshaghi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholesky decompositionComputer scienceComputational complexity theoryMinimum degree algorithmMatrix decompositionTransposeMultiplexingComputational scienceAlgorithmParallel computingIncomplete Cholesky factorization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Matrix decomposition approaches are the techniques that partition a complex matrix into its constituents in order to reduce the computational complexity of different matrix calculations. Among different decomposition techniques, Cholesky decomposition [1] , in which a Hermitian positive semi-definite matrix is decomposed into the product between a lower triangular matrix and its conjugate transpose, has been employed in different applications [2] . In particular, Cholesky decomposition has been widely used to compute the inverse of large matrices [3] , because of the advantages it offers terms of the computational complexity and memory requirements [4] . While matrix decomposition reduces the computational complexity, the hardware in which the decomposition is performed affects the overall efficiency and the time required to decompose the matrix. Photonics-based computation has been proposed as a promising approach that offers low-computational cost for ultra-fast data processing [5] . In this paper, a photonic computing architecture is proposed to improve the time and power efficiency of Cholesky decomposition. This is specifically attractive for wireless communication systems, where computational resources are limited and the data needs to be processed on the fly. The proposed architecture is based on Broadcast-and-Weight (B&W) protocol [6] , in which a bank of microring modulators and wavelength division multiplexing scheme are utilized to implement dot product in an optical platform. In the proposed architecture, a feedback control procedure is designed to set the weights by applying voltages to microring resonators.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207