MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994173006 · doi:10.1121/1.4708014

Source localization using a double three-dimensional intensity array

2012· article· en· W1994173006 on OpenAlexaff
Sung-Kyu Cho, Jeong–Guon Ih

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnechoic chamberAcousticsMicrophone arrayIntensity (physics)MicrophoneRange (aeronautics)Bearing (navigation)Sound intensityAperture (computer memory)Computer scienceOpticsPhysicsMaterials scienceLoudspeakerArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The precision of source localization methods using an array of multiple microphones depends on the number of microphones and spacing, i.e., it requires many microphones, small spacing and large aperture. To overcome the demerit in size, cost and data processing time, a double-module array system was suggested, of which a three-dimensional intensity array consists of a module. A three-dimensional intensity vector indicating the bearing angle was estimated using a set of four microphones arranged in a tetrahedral shape. Because a microphone in the apex was used in common for two modules along with the compactness of tetrahedron, number of microphones and size could be reduced. To cover a wide frequency range, two modules had different microphone spacing to minimize the low frequency phase error and high frequency finite difference error. Three-dimensional intensity was calculated by using the Taylor series expansion. For a double-module array having 16 and 80 mm in array spacing, simulations, assuming an anechoic condition, were conducted to test performances of angle detection varying bearing angle of source location, which was 1.3 m apart from the detection module. Average error of all bearing angles was less than 2o for 270-7800 Hz. (Partially supported by BK 21 project)

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207