Compressive sensing‐based speech enhancement in non‐sparse noisy environments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the authors previous work, a compressive sensing (CS)‐based method has been proposed to address speech enhancement (SE) in adverse environments (CS‐SPEN) based on an assumption of sparse noise. However, this assumption may not be satisfied in practical noisy environments. In this study, the authors study this issue by relaxing this assumption to consider a general non‐sparse noise case, such that the proposed method naturally extends the previous one. In particular, they solve the theoretic difficulty of CS‐SPEN on the treatment of non‐sparse noise by using a relaxed upper bound for the constraint governing data consistency and a relaxed estimation error bound. Their main result is mathematically proved. In addition, the effectiveness of the proposed method is demonstrated by computational simulations, showing certain improvements to the previous method for both stationary and non‐stationary white Gaussian noises across various segmental signal‐noise‐ratios (SNRs). In these cases, the proposed method is shown to have comparable results to the state‐of‐the‐art SE alogrithms and some advantages over them at low SNRs. CS‐SPEN without the sparse noise assumption works evenly with CS‐SPEN with the sparse noise assumption for car internal and F16 cockpit noises.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it