Deconvolute Technology

Understanding the Monotonicity of the Sparsity Objective Function | HackerNoon

Table of Links Abstract and 1. Introduction 2. Preliminaries and 2.1. Blind deconvolution 2.2. Quadratic neural networks 3. Methodology 3.1. Time domain quadratic convolutional filter 3.2. Superiority of cyclic features extraction by QCNN 3.3. Frequency domain linear filter with envelope spectrum objective function 3.4. Integral optimization with uncertainty-aware weighing scheme 4. Computational experiments 4.1. Experimental configurations 4.2. Case study 1: PU dataset 4.3. Case study 2: JNU dataset 4.4. Case study 3: HIT dataset 5.

Read More »

Quadratic Networks Excel in Extracting Features Compared to Conventional Networks | HackerNoon

Table of Links Abstract and 1. Introduction 2. Preliminaries and 2.1. Blind deconvolution 2.2. Quadratic neural networks 3. Methodology 3.1. Time domain quadratic convolutional filter 3.2. Superiority of cyclic features extraction by QCNN 3.3. Frequency domain linear filter with envelope spectrum objective function 3.4. Integral optimization with uncertainty-aware weighing scheme 4. Computational experiments 4.1. Experimental configurations 4.2. Case study 1: PU dataset 4.3. Case study 2: JNU dataset 4.4. Case study 3: HIT dataset 5.

Read More »

ClassBD Achieves Exceptional Anti-Noise Performance on HIT Dataset with F1 Score Above 96% | HackerNoon

Table of Links Abstract and 1. Introduction 2. Preliminaries and 2.1. Blind deconvolution 2.2. Quadratic neural networks 3. Methodology 3.1. Time domain quadratic convolutional filter 3.2. Superiority of cyclic features extraction by QCNN 3.3. Frequency domain linear filter with envelope spectrum objective function 3.4. Integral optimization with uncertainty-aware weighing scheme 4. Computational experiments 4.1. Experimental configurations 4.2. Case study 1: PU dataset 4.3. Case study 2: JNU dataset 4.4. Case study 3: HIT dataset 5.

Read More »