MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132536848 · doi:10.1109/tasl.2006.885246

Statistical Analysis of Doubletalk Detection for Calibration and Performance Evaluation

2007· article· en· W2132536848 on OpenAlexaff
J.D. Gordy, Rafik Goubran

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorDetection theoryCalibrationProbability density functionEstimatorDetection thresholdComputer scienceStatistical powerSIGNAL (programming language)AlgorithmStatistical modelVariable (mathematics)StatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Doubletalk detection is an important part of a practical echo canceller implementation, but a difficult problem is calibrating the doubletalk detector for arbitrary environments and input signals. In this paper, it is shown that a statistical model of a doubletalk detection variable's probability density function (PDF) can be used to obtain an optimal detection threshold and expected detection performance curves. In particular, a statistical analysis of a recently proposed cross-correlation-based doubletalk detector is presented. The doubletalk detection variable is modeled in terms of its constituent parameter estimators, resulting in conditional PDFs in the absence and presence of doubletalk. These are used to obtain a signal-adaptive detection threshold for calibration, and to provide expected doubletalk detection probability. Simulations are presented comparing the theoretical and measured detection probability compared to a fixed detection threshold for speech input and doubletalk signals. The results indicate a close agreement with the proposed model for moderate-to-high levels of doubletalk

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language ProcessingSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207