MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413165789 · doi:10.3390/s25165012

Deep Learning-Based Denoising of Noisy Vibration Signals from Wavefront Sensors Using BiL-DCAE

2025· article· en· W4413165789 on OpenAlexaff
Yun Pan, Quan Luo, Yiyou Fan, Hao Chen, Donghua Zhou, Hongsheng Luo, Wei Jiang, Jinshan Su

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWavefrontVibrationSIGNAL (programming language)AcousticsNoise reductionNoise (video)Offset (computer science)Wavefront sensorComputer scienceSensitivity (control systems)Remote sensingArtificial intelligenceGeologyEngineeringOpticsPhysicsElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In geophysical exploration, laser remote sensing detection of seismic waves based on wavefront sensors can be used for geological detection and geophysical exploration. However, due to the high sensitivity of the wavefront sensor, it is easy to be affected by the environmental light and vibration, resulting in random noise, which is difficult to predict, thus significantly reducing the quality of the vibration signal and the detection accuracy. In this paper, a large amount of data is collected through a single-point vibration detection experiment, and the relationship between amplitude and spot centroid offset is analyzed and calculated. The real noisy vibration signal is denoised and signal enhanced by using a BiLSTM denoising convolutional self-encoder (BiL-DCAE). The irregular and unpredictable noise generated by various complex noise mixing is successfully suppressed, and its impact on the vibration signal is reduced. The signal-to-noise ratio of the signal is increased by 13.90 dB on average, and the noise power is reduced by 95.93%, which greatly improves the detection accuracy.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207