MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084672155 · doi:10.1121/1.4861239

A model that predicts the binaural advantage to speech intelligibility from the mixed target and interferer signals

2014· article· en· W2084672155 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Cosentino, Torsten Marquardt, David McAlpine, John F. Culling, Tiago H. Falk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersImpact Fund
KeywordsBinaural recordingIntelligibility (philosophy)Computer scienceMixed modelAcousticsSpeech recognitionPhysicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A model is presented that predicts the binaural advantage to speech intelligibility by analyzing the right and left recordings at the two ears containing mixed target and interferer signals. This auditory-inspired model implements an equalization-cancellation stage to predict the binaural unmasking (BU) component, in conjunction with a modulation-frequency estimation block to estimate the "better ear" effect (BE) component of the binaural advantage. The model's performance was compared to experimental data obtained under anechoic and reverberant conditions using a single speech-shaped noise interferer paradigm. The internal BU and BE components were compared to those of the speech intelligibility model recently proposed by Lavandier et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 218-231 (2012)], which requires separate inputs for target and interferer. The data indicate that the proposed model provides comparably good predictions from a mixed-signals input under both anechoic and reverberant conditions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207