MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110440191 · doi:10.1109/lsp.2005.845604

Nonintrusive speech quality evaluation using an adaptive neurofuzzy inference system

2005· article· en· W2110440191 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

VenueIEEE Signal Processing Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Communications and Noise
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOticon Fonden
KeywordsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemInferenceComputer scienceFuzzy inference systemQuality (philosophy)Speech recognitionStandard errorCorrelationStandard systemArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Data miningMachine learningFuzzy logicFuzzy control systemStatisticsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter presents a novel nonintrusive speech quality evaluation method using an adaptive neurofuzzy inference system (ANFIS). The proposed method employed a first-order Sugeno-type fuzzy inference system (FIS) to estimate speech quality using only the output signal of the system under test. This new method was compared with the state-of-the-art nonintrusive quality evaluation standard, the ITU-T P.563 Recommendation, using seven subjective quality databases of the ITU-T P-series Supplementary 23. Experimental results show that the correlation of the proposed method with the subjective quality scores reached 0.8812, with a standard error of 0.3647 across the entire database. This compares favorably with the standard P.563, which provides a correlation and standard error of 0.8422 and 0.4493, respectively.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.252 · 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