MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013354643 · doi:10.1177/0018720809336435

Simple Displays of Talker Location Improve Voice Identification Performance in Multitalker, Spatialized Audio Environments

2009· article· en· W2013354643 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ryan Kilgore

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceActive listeningTask (project management)Audio visualSpeech recognitionPsychologyMultimediaCommunicationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the voice identification benefits of visual depictions of the relative locations of spatialized talkers in a serial listening task. BACKGROUND: Although spatialized audio is known to improve speech intelligibility and voice identification accuracy within multitalker environments, prior studies have not found any additional benefit for augmenting spatialized audio with visual depictions of relative voice locations. These studies, however, were restricted to small audio environments (four voices), potentially limiting the ability of simple talker location displays to provide additional identification benefit. METHOD: In the first experiment, 18 participants performed a voice identification task for four- and eight-voice environments under three display conditions: (a) nonspatialized voices with an audio-only display, (b) spatialized voices with an audio-only display, and (c) spatialized voices augmented by a visual display of relative talker locations. In the second experiment, 32 participants performed the same voice identification task within a spatialized eight-voice environment but with audio and visual displays of differing angular scale. RESULTS: Visually depicting relative talker locations improved voice identification performance in terms of both accuracy and response time, particularly for more populous auditory spaces. Both auditory and visual display scale affected these benefits, with large-angle displays performing the best for both modalities. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that simple visual representations of spatialized audio environments help listeners identify voices and that these representations are more effective when the angular spacing (auditory and visual) between talker locations is increased. APPLICATION: These results have important implications for the design and implementation of collaborative audio environments for shared, desktop, and portable communication devices.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207