On the combined effects of early- and late-arriving sound on spatial impression in concert halls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes six new experiments involving subjective ratings of the listener envelopment, LEV, and the apparent source width, ASW, of simulated sound fields. Previous work has identified LEV and ASW as the principal components of spatial impression in concert halls and has shown that ASW is primarily influenced by the level of early lateral reflections and LEV by late-arriving lateral reflections. The new results in this paper show that LEV can result from nonlateral late-arriving sounds and demonstrate the conflicting effects of early- and late-arriving lateral sound on ASW and LEV when both are present, as would occur in real halls. While it is possible to create simulated sound fields with only either LEV or ASW, in typical concert halls, the balance between early- and late-arriving lateral sound will determine the relative importance of LEV and ASW. LEV and ASW are shown to be perceived when the critical components of the sound field are salient relative to other components. The results of the new subjective studies were used to estimate expected ASW and LEV in 16 halls. In these halls LEV is predicted to be the stronger component of spatial impression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".