MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526258622 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1993.332312

Analysis of subband quantization noise level and shapes: a function of wideband audio codec tandemming

2002· article· en· W1526258622 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony C. Koch, M.P. Beddoes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodecQuantization (signal processing)PsychoacousticsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionSpeech codingWideband audioNoise shapingWidebandSound qualityAudio signalDigital audioAcousticsElectronic engineeringAlgorithmTelecommunicationsPhysicsEngineeringComputer visionPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Newly developed codecs for wideband audio signals rely on subband coding and psychoacoustic modeling to achieve significant reduction in the bit rate of a digital audio signal. An investigation into the shape and level of quantization noise introduced into a coded audio signal is performed. Psychoacoustic principles reveal that quantization noise is masked, i.e. made inaudible, if its spectral shape fails below that of the original signal by a 13 dB threshold. Simulation results show that there is a strong correlation of quantization noise and original signal shapes at low bit allocations. Quantization noise levels which increase result in a degradation of the quality of a codec. A criterion for the evaluation of a codec is its performance when tandemmed. Simulation results reveal that there can be up to an 18 dB increase in average subband noise energy for eight tandems. Surprisingly, subbands more vulnerable to an increase in quantization noise tend to exhibit a high signal to mask ratio, as determined by the psychoacoustic model.>

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207