MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012902276 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2007.366951

An Approach to Formant Frequency Estimation at Low Signal-to-Noise Ratio

2007· article· en· W2012902276 on OpenAlexaff
Shaikh Anowarul Fattah, Wei‐Ping Zhu, M. Omair Ahmad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormantSpeech recognitionComputer scienceTIMITImpulse responseWhite noiseGaussian noiseAutoregressive modelVocal tractNoise (video)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Speech processingAcousticsAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsHidden Markov modelTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for the formant frequency estimation of the voiced speech segments in the presence of noise is presented in this paper. A correlation model for the voiced speech is proposed considering the vocal-tract system as an autoregressive moving average (ARMA) model with a periodic impulse-train excitation. It is shown that the formant frequencies can be directly obtained from the model parameters. An adaptive residue-based least-squares optimization algorithm is proposed to estimate the model parameters, which overcomes the failure of conventional correlation based techniques in estimating formant frequencies at a low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The proposed algorithm has been tested on synthetic and natural vowels as well as voiced segments of some naturally spoken sentences from TIMIT database in presence of white Gaussian or babble noises. The experimental results show that the proposed method is more robust to noise than some existing methods even at a low SNR of 0 dB.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207