Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Technological advances have enabled exponential growth in both sensor data collection, as well as computational processing. However, as a limiting factor, the transmission bandwidth in between a space-based sensor and a ground station processing center has not seen the same growth. A resolution to this bandwidth limitation is to move the processing to the sensor, but doing so faces size, weight, and power operational constraints. Different physical constraints on processor manufacturing are spurring a resurgence in neuromorphic approaches amenable to the space-based operational environment. Here we describe historical trends in computer architecture and the implications for neuromorphic computing, as well as give an overview of how remote sensing applications may be impacted by this emerging direction for computing.

Abstract not provided.

Of the non-corrupted data collected by the Orbiting Experiment (forté) satellite’s Photo-Diode Detector during the year 2001, I estimate that 7.9% of 914 894 signals are noise. My result differs dramatically from Guillen’s estimate of 96%. To arrive at this estimate, I used Gaussian mixture model (GMM) clustering–unsupervised machine learning–to aggregate the wave forms into groups based on the absolute value of the lowest 25 positive frequency discrete Fourier transform coefficients. Then, I marked several of the groups as noise by inspecting a random sampling of wave forms from each group. Marking groups as either noise or non-noise is a supervised binary classification operation. After removing the signals in noise groups from further consideration, I clustered the remaining signals into families. Again, I used a GMM, but for the familial clustering I used a Non-Negative Matrix Factorization feature vector transform. The result was 9 distinct families of lightning signals, as well as a second stage of noise filtering. To efficiently represent the entirety of the signal space, I broke each family into deciles based on their distance from the family mean. In this case, distance means the log-likelihood based on the GMM. Signals in lower deciles are more similar in shape and amplitude to their family average. I took the top 200 samples from each decile of each group, resulting in 18 000 signals. These signal approximately represent the entirety of the forté observations. To represent outliers, I also kept a zoo of the 1000 signals furthest from any family’s average. All told, the resulting data set represents the forté data with a reduction of about 51:1. To allow synthesis of an arbitrarily large number of test signals, I also captured each family’s average signal and the time-sample covariance matrix over the signals in each family. Using these two pieces of information, I can synthesize new waveforms by using a Gaussian random realization from the family average and covariance matrix. I wrote a program to test the synthesis quality. The program shows me two signals on the screen, one synthesized and one randomly drawn from the data. I attempted to identify the synthesized signal. Although the synthesis is imperfect, in an A/B comparison I only correctly chose the synthesized signal 36% of the time.