Modeling auditory localization in the low-frequency range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Binaural recordings were made for subwoofer reproduction of octave-band noise bursts at 31.5-Hz, 63-Hz and 125-Hz center frequencies, and these low-frequency responses were analyzed using a binaural model simulating human perception. As expected, the interaural level differences remained nearly constant for different sound source positions within this low-frequency range. On the basis of interaural time differences, however, the model was able to predict the left/right position of the sound source on the interaural axis. In order to visualize the cross-correlation peak at low frequencies in the ITD range from −1.5 ms to +1.5 ms, the cross-correlation functions were decompressed by taking them to the power of 40. At these low-frequencies, the range of phase difference does not vary much with different sound positions although the ITDs are on the same order as for higher frequencies (≊−1.0 ms to 1.0 ms), but the human ability to resolve very small phase differences already has been shown in previous investigations. The predictions of the model simulation were verified in a listening test. The repetition of the experiment in a second more reverberant space showed similar reductions in performance for both the human listeners and the model. [Work supported by VRQ.]
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".