MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002357419 · doi:10.1117/12.732447

Time-frequency multipliers for sound synthesis

2007· article· en· W2002357419 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Depalle, Richard Kronland-Martinet, Bruno Torrésani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Filter Design and Implementation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTransfer functionWaveletTime–frequency analysisPointwiseFrequency domainMultiplication (music)AlgorithmContext (archaeology)Filter (signal processing)MathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time-frequency analysis and wavelet analysis are generally used for providing signal expansions that are suitable for various further tasks such as signal analysis, de-noising, compression, source separation, ... However, time-frequency analysis and wavelet analysis also provide efficient ways for constructing signals' transformations. They are modelled as linear operators that can be designed directly in the transformed domain, i.e. the time-frequency plane, or the time-scale half plane. Among these linear operators, transformations that are diagonal in the time-frequency or time scale spaces, i.e. that may be expressed by multiplications in these domains, deserve particular attention, as they are extremely simple to implement, even though their properties are not necessarily easy to control. This work is a first attempt for exploring such approaches in the context of the analysis and the design of sound signals. We study more specifically the transformations that may be interpreted as linear time-varying (LTV) systems (often called time-varying filters). It is known that under certain assumptions, the latter may be conveniently represented by pointwise multiplication with a certain time frequency transfer function in the time-frequency domain. The purpose of this work is to examine such representations in practical situations, and investigate generalizations. The originality of this approach for sound synthesis lies in the design of practical operators that can be optimized to morph a given sound into another one, at a very high sound quality.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDigital Filter Design and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207