Blind channel estimation and data detection using hidden Markov models theory

In this correspondence, we propose applying the hiddenMarkov models (HMM) theory to the problem of blind channel estimationand data detection. The Baum–Welch (BW) algorithm, which is able toestimate all the parameters of the model, is enriched by introducingsome linear constraints emerging from a linear FIR hypothesis on thechannel. Additionally, a version of the algorithm that is suitable for timevaryingchannels is also presented. Performance is analyzed in a GSMenvironment using standard test channels and is found to be close to thatobtained with a nonblind receiver.

High-performance payload data handling system for Gaia

Gaia is the most ambitious space astrometry mission currently envisaged and is a technological challenge in all its aspects. We describe a proposal for the payload data handling system of Gaia, as an example of a high-performance, real-time, concurrent, and pipelined data system. This proposal includes the front-end systems for the instrumentation, the data acquisition and management modules, the star data processing modules, and the payload data handling unit. We also review other payload and service module elements and we illustrate a data flux proposal.

Kernel-PCA data integration with enhanced interpretability

Background Nowadays, combining the different sources of information to improve the biological knowledge available is a challenge in bioinformatics. One of the most powerful methods for integrating heterogeneous data types are kernel-based methods. Kernel-based data integration approaches consist of two basic steps: firstly the right kernel is chosen for each data set; secondly the kernels from the different data sources are combined to give a complete representation of the available data for a given statistical task. Results We analyze the integration of data from several sources of information using kernel PCA, from the point of view of reducing dimensionality. Moreover, we improve the interpretability of kernel PCA by adding to the plot the representation of the input variables that belong to any dataset. In particular, for each input variable or linear combination of input variables, we can represent the direction of maximum growth locally, which allows us to identify those samples with higher/lower values of the variables analyzed. Conclusions The integration of different datasets and the simultaneous representation of samples and variables together give us a better understanding of biological knowledge.

Improving the Quality of EEG Data in Patients With Alzheimers Disease Using ICA

Does Independent Component Analysis (ICA) denature EEG signals? We applied ICA to two groups of subjects (mild Alzheimer patients and control subjects). The aim of this study was to examine whether or not the ICA method can reduce both group di®erences and within-subject variability. We found that ICA diminished Leave-One- Out root mean square error (RMSE) of validation (from 0.32 to 0.28), indicative of the reduction of group di®erence. More interestingly, ICA reduced the inter-subject variability within each group (¾ = 2:54 in the ± range before ICA, ¾ = 1:56 after, Bartlett p = 0.046 after Bonfer- roni correction). Additionally, we present a method to limit the impact of human error (' 13:8%, with 75.6% inter-cleaner agreement) during ICA cleaning, and reduce human bias. These ¯ndings suggests the novel usefulness of ICA in clinical EEG in Alzheimer's disease for reduction of subject variability.

One, two, or many mechanisms? The brain's processing of complex words

The heated debate over whether there is only a single mechanism or two mechanisms for morphology has diverted valuable research energy away from the more critical questions about the neural computations involved in the comprehension and production of morphologically complex forms. Cognitive neuroscience data implicate many brain areas. All extant models, whether they rely on a connectionist network or espouse two mechanisms, are too underspecified to explain why more than a few brain areas differ in their activity during the processing of regular and irregular forms. No one doubts that the brain treats regular and irregular words differently, but brain data indicate that a simplistic account will not do. It is time for us to search for the critical factors free from theoretical blinders.