MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2016365782 · doi:10.1121/1.4877486

Weighting of interaural time difference and interaural level difference cues in wide-band stimuli with varying low and high frequency energy balance

2014· article· en· W2016365782 on OpenAlexaff
Ewan A. Macpherson, Tran M Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteraural time differenceWeightingHeadphonesAcousticsSound localizationWidebandPsychoacousticsStimulus (psychology)Just-noticeable differenceMathematicsAudiologyPhysicsPsychologyOpticsPerceptionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wideband stimuli carry both interaural time and level difference (ITD and ILD) sound location cues. Previously, listener weighting of those cues has only been measured for low-pass, high-pass, and flat spectrum wide-band conditions [Macpherson and Middlebrooks, JASA (2002)]. In this study, we determined how weighting of ITD and ILD cues varied with the low- and high-frequency energy balance in wide-band stimuli. Listeners reported locations of targets that were presented over headphones using individual head related transfer functions. ITD and ILD cues were manipulated by attenuating or delaying the sound at one ear (by up to 300μs or 10dB), and the final weight was computed by comparing the listener's localization response bias to the imposed cue bias. Stimuli were 100-ms bursts of noise whose spectra were flat from 0.5 to 2 kHz and from 4 to 16 kHz with a level difference between those low- and high-frequency ranges varying in 10-dB steps from −30 to + 30 dB. ILD weight increased (from ~0.5 to 1.5 deg/dB) with increasing high-frequency energy, but ITD weight was constant (~0.08 deg/us) across spectral profiles. The results suggest that in wideband stimuli, weighting of ILD is more stimulus dependent than weighting of ITD.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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