MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2013632080 · doi:10.1121/1.4785412

Speech intelligibility in real and virtual classrooms

2004· article· en· W2013632080 on OpenAlexaff
Wonyoung Yang, Murray Hodgson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReverberationHeadphonesIntelligibility (philosophy)LoudspeakerAcousticsComputer scienceActive listeningSpeech recognitionPsychologyPhysicsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In current research by the authors, auralization is being used to identify the optimal reverberation times and signal-to-noise level differences for speech in classrooms. The work presented here was initiated to validate the auralization procedure in comparison with live listening tests in real classrooms. Reverberation and noise conditions were created in both real and virtual classrooms, and speech intelligibility tests performed. Two architecturally identical classrooms which have different amounts of sound absorption were selected for real classroom speech intelligibility tests, and their acoustical parameters were measured. Speech and noise sources were placed at the fronts and backs of the classrooms. Speech intelligibility tests were performed at three positions with normal-hearing subjects. The modified rhyme test (MRT) and the noise babble were generated by loudspeakers. The classrooms and speech intelligibility test conditions were then simulated for auralization using CATT-Acoustics, based on the real classroom measurement results. Virtual speech intelligibility tests were performed on the same subjects in the laboratory using headphones. The MRT results in the real and virtual classrooms were compared.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→