MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230675618 · doi:10.2172/1434573

Compressed sensing with sparse corruptions: Fault-tolerant sparse collocation approximations

2018· report· en· W4230675618 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Adcock, Anyi Bao, John Jakeman, Akil Naryan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingAlgorithmParameterized complexityComputer scienceParametric statisticsMathematical optimizationRegularization (linguistics)A priori and a posterioriApplied mathematicsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recovery of approximately sparse or compressible coefficients in a polynomial chaos expansion is a common goal in many modern parametric uncertainty quantification (UQ) problems. However, relatively little effort in UQ has been directed toward theoretical and computational strategies for addressing the sparse corruptions problem, where a small number of measurements are highly corrupted. Such a situation has become pertinent today since modern computational frameworks are sufficiently complex with many interdependent components that may introduce hardware and software failures, some of which can be difficult to detect and result in a highly polluted simulation result. In this paper we present a novel compressive sampling-based theoretical analysis for a regularized t1 minimization algorithm that aims to recover sparse expansion coefficients in the presence of measurement corruptions. Our recovery results are uniform (the theoretical guarantees hold for all compressible signals and compressible corruptions vectors), and prescribe algorithmic regularization parameters in terms of a user-defined a priori estimate on the ratio of measurements that are believed to be corrupted. We also propose an iteratively reweighted optimization algorithm that automatically refines the value of the regularization parameter, and empirically produces superior results. Our numerical results test our framework on several medium-to-high dimensional examples of solutions to parameterized differential equations, and demonstrate the effectiveness of our 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207