MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020836673 · doi:10.1121/1.3089221

Beamforming with microphone arrays for directional sources

2009· article· en· W2020836673 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Bouchard, David I. Havelock, Martin Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Microstructural SciencesUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeamformingComputer scienceMicrophone arrayWeightingAcousticsNoise (video)Array gainWavefrontMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorAlgorithmMicrophoneAntenna arrayMathematicsPhysicsAntenna (radio)TelecommunicationsOpticsStatisticsLoudspeakerEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beamforming is done with an array of sensors to achieve a directional or spatially-specific response by using a model of the arriving wavefront. Real acoustic sources may deviate from the conventional plane wave or monopole model, causing decreased array gain or a total breakdown of beamforming. An alternative to beamforming with the conventional source model is presented which avoids this by using a more general source model. The proposed method defines a set of "sub-beamformers," each designed to respond to a different spatial mode of the source. The outputs of the individual sub-beamformers are combined in a weighted sum to give an overall output of better quality than that of a conventional (monopole) beamformer. It is shown that with appropriate weighting, the optimum array gain can be achieved. A simple method is demonstrated to estimate the weighted sum, based on the observed data. The variance and bias of the estimate in the presence of noise are evaluated. Simulation and experimentally measured results are shown for a simple directive source. In the experiment, the proposed method provides an array gain of about 11 dB while beamforming using a point source model achieves only -4 dB.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207