MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015679331 · doi:10.1109/coginf.2009.5250762

Fractal modelling of residues in linear predictive coding of speech

2009· article· en· W2015679331 on OpenAlexaff
Witold Kinsner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech codingLinear predictive codingResidualFractalComputer scienceSpeech recognitionLinear predictionVector sum excited linear predictionCode-excited linear predictionAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a novel approach of fractal modelling and coding of residuals for excitation in the linear predictive coding of speech. This work was motivated by reducing the bit rate to 1200 bps, while maintaining a good quality of speech. Linear prediction based speech coders differ primarily in the modelling of the residual. The design trade-off in the modelling of the residual is between quality and bit-rate. In this paper fractal modelling is used to model the residual. We show that fractal modelling reduces the bit-rate while maintaining quality. A 6 kbps speech coder was implemented using the piecewise self-affine fractal model. The new coder has a signal-to-noise ratio of 10.9 dB. An informal subjective measure found the perceptual quality to be comparable to that of the 13 kbps GSM coder.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207