Objective quality measurement of the excitation of impact sounds in a source/filter model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the modeling of percussive (non-sustained) sounds, the excitation signal can be estimated from an original sound in several ways, usually by a time-domain deconvolution process. The source signal obtained by such a process cannot be compared with the original excitation because it is usually unknown. Hence in most of the approaches available in the literature, the validation of the deconvolution process is quantifed in terms of spectral flatness, i.e. a source signal is considered as a good estimation of the excitation when most of the resonant content has been removed. However, the excitation signal is usually a percussive burst, the time domain properties of which are known to be very important, at least perceptually speaking. To evaluate the time domain properties of the estimated excitation, we propose in this paper to compare the estimated excitation to the recording of the acceleration of the hammer hitting a plate. In the recordings considered, the evolution of the acceleration of the hammer has a specifc pattern with several peaks due to the bouncing of the hammer on the suspended plate. This specifc pattern allows us to propose a metric that can be useful for objectively measuring the quality of the estimation process.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".