MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978536407 · doi:10.1121/1.2934968

Refining mapping strategies to improve the sound quality of physically controlled synthesis

2008· article· en· W1978536407 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Verfaille, Arnaud Rebillout, Philippe Guillemain, Marcelo M. Wanderley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTimbreSound qualityControllabilityFrame (networking)Sound recording and reproductionComputationAudio signalQuality (philosophy)Speech recognitionDatabaseAlgorithmAcousticsMathematicsSpeech coding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new technique, called 'physically controlled synthesis', is being developed to improve the controllability and sound quality of digital sound synthesis. It can be seen as a mapping strategy that combines a synthesis model based on a physical model (controllability) with a signal model based on additive synthesis (sound quality), and a database of pre-analyzed natural instrumental sounds. A key point is the computation of perceptually relevant timbre descriptors that interface the two synthesizers to provide additive synthesis data by navigating the database and selecting neighbour additive frames to morph. To limit the latency introduced, we developed specific algorithms to extract sound features from the physical model; the database size was increased offline by using a higher control sampling rate. In addition to previous works by the authors, devoted to the permanent regime and using a 2D indexation of the additive database, transients handling is achieved through a 3D search in a frame-by-frame basis that ignores the natural time unfolding, hence allowing to choose the best frame with the proper pitch in addition to the two other sound descriptors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207