Stimuli and Normative Data for Detection of Ling-6 Sounds in Hearing Level
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
PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to develop and evaluate a calibrated version of the Ling-6 sounds for evaluation of aided detection thresholds. Stimuli were recorded, and data from calibration values in dB HL were developed. Aided performance was characterized in adults and children. METHOD: Stimuli were recorded, prepared, and transferred to a CD for testing. Initial testing was completed on 29 normally hearing young adults to determine typical responses in dB SPL and reliability. Corrections to dB HL were determined for each stimulus. Twenty-seven adults and 5 children with hearing losses were tested. RESULTS: Average normal sound field thresholds were 1 dB HL. Aided thresholds for adults varied with unaided hearing level and were better for low-frequency sounds. Adults and children performed differently, possibly because of greater hearing aid gain for children. CONCLUSIONS: Stimulus preparation and shaping resulted in a recorded, calibrated set of Ling-6 stimuli that provide flat normal thresholds in hearing level for normally hearing listeners. Typical performance ranges may vary with hearing level and prescription. More data are required to fully characterize this trend in the pediatric population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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