MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000888517 · doi:10.1049/el.2014.1847

Direction‐of‐arrival estimation for far‐field acoustic signal in presence of near‐field interferences

2014· article· en· W2000888517 on OpenAlexaff
Liang Zhang, Jidan Mei, A. Zieliński, Ping Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNear and far fieldAcousticsDirection of arrivalSIGNAL (programming language)Interference (communication)Field (mathematics)BeamformingComputationComputer sciencePhysicsOpticsTelecommunicationsMathematicsAlgorithmAntenna (radio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The far‐field acoustic signal received by an acoustic array is frequently affected by near‐field interferences. This causes deterioration of the direction‐of‐arrival (DOA) estimate for the far‐field signal. To enhance the DOA estimate, the novel near‐field/far‐field (NFFF) beamformer is proposed. Such a beamformer optimises the beam pattern for far‐field detection by maximising the beamformer output in the direction of the far‐field target signal with the imposed condition to eliminate interfering signals from near‐field locations. As the interference suppression only occurs at specific positions of near‐field interferences, a blind zone in the far‐field direction present in conventional methods will not be introduced. The NFFF beamformer is also applicable for coherent signals and for multi‐interferers. For a stationary situation where interferers’ locations are fixed, the NFFF beamformer computations do not require time updates and the computational load is similar to that of the conventional beamformer. The method can be extended to several situations such as acoustic monitoring performed from a stationary platform subjected to water currents, waves, winds and other variables, all of them generating nearby interferences, and also to different array configurations including two‐dimensional (2D) and 3D arrays.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronics LettersSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207