2202.05330
Data-driven sensor placement with shallow decoder networks
Jan Williams, Olivia Zahn, J. Nathan Kutz
incompletemedium confidence
- Category
- math.DS
- Journal tier
- Specialist/Solid
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper’s QR-with-SDN pipeline and its QR argument (maximizing a greedy volume surrogate via CPQR; Eq. 9–11) are standard and empirically supported, but largely heuristic without formal risk guarantees; its pruning results are also empirical and explained qualitatively (sensor clustering) . The model’s solution correctly reconstructs the CPQR logic and adds reasonable conditioning and noise-propagation analyses, but it implicitly assumes generalization when claiming SDN cannot underperform the linear POD map for fixed Φ, and it moves from MSE to relative-error ordering via an upper bound only—both require additional assumptions not present in the paper or proof sketch. Hence, both are incomplete: the paper for lack of formal performance guarantees, the model for unspoken assumptions about training and generalization.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid \textbf{Justification:} The paper presents a pragmatic and effective combination of QR-based sensor placement with shallow decoder networks, supported by careful experiments and a clear negative result for magnitude-based pruning. The CPQR argument is standard and well-motivated but remains heuristic; pruning analysis is qualitative. Modest additions—clarifying theoretical claims, better quantification of pruning effects, and minor exposition fixes—would strengthen the contribution.