MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107461080 · doi:10.1155/asp.2005.25

Performance of GCC- and AMDF-Based Time-Delay Estimation in Practical Reverberant Environments

2005· article· en· W2107461080 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorReverberationComputer scienceNoise (video)Function (biology)Speech recognitionWeightingAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there has been an increased interest in the use of the time-delay estimation (TDE) technique to locate and track acoustic sources in a reverberant environment. Typically, the delay estimate is obtained through identifying the extremum of the generalized cross-correlation (GCC) function or the average magnitude difference function (AMDF). These estimators are well studied and their statistical performance is well understood for single-path propagation situations. However, fewer efforts have been reported to show their performance behavior in real reverberation conditions. This paper reexamines the GCC- and AMDF-based TDE techniques in real room reverberant and noisy environments. Our contribution is threefold. First, we propose a weighted cross-correlation (WCC) estimator in which the GCC function is weighted by the reciprocal of AMDF. This new method can sharpen the peak of the GCC function, which corresponds to the true time delay and thus leads to a better estimation performance as compared to the conventional GCC estimator. Second, we propose a modified version of the AMDF (MAMDF) estimator in which the delay is determined by jointly considering the AMDF and the average magnitude sum function (AMSF). Third, we compare the performance of the GCC, AMDF, WCC, and MAMDF estimators in real reverberant and noisy environments. It is shown that the AMDF estimator can yield better performance in favorable noise conditions and is slightly more resilient to reverberation than the GCC method. The GCC approach, however, is found to outperform the AMDF method in strong noisy environments. Weighting the correlation function by the reciprocal of AMDF can improve the performance of the GCC estimator in reverberation conditions, yet its improvement in noisy environments is limited. The MAMDF algorithm can enhance the AMDF estimator in both reverberant and noisy environments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.273 · 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