MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1813353062 · doi:10.1109/scft.1999.781477

LPC quantization requirements for the GPP-CELP coder

2003· article· en· W1813353062 on OpenAlexaff
P. Mermelstein, Yasheng Qian, K. Zarrinkoub

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCode-excited linear predictionCodebookVector sum excited linear predictionSpeech codingLinear predictionLinear predictive codingQuantization (signal processing)Speech recognitionResidualComputer scienceHarmonic Vector Excitation CodingLinde–Buzo–Gray algorithmAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Code-excited linear prediction coding with generalized pitch prediction (GPP-CELP) requires linear prediction filtering of the stochastic codebook output prior to addition of the adaptive codebook (ACE) component. The ACE component represents a sequence of past reconstructed samples passed through a low-pass filter to reflect the reduced pitch periodicity of the higher speech frequencies. The spectrum of the residual manifests broad peaks leading to significantly narrower distributions in the LPC parameter space. Additionally, the quantization error of the residual may be masked by the significantly greater energy of the ACE component. This work compares the quantization requirements for the information required to represent the time-varying LPC filter of the GPP-CELP coder with that of the classical CELP coder. With non-predictive coding of the LPC information a bit-rate reduction from 20 bits/20 ms to 16 bits/20 ms appears feasible without introducing noticeable degradation due to quantization.

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)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207