MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136207028 · doi:10.1109/imtc.2008.4547192

Security Instrument using Talker Identification and Microphone Arrays in Variable Noisy Environments

2008· article· en· W2136207028 on OpenAlexaff
A.R. Abu-El-Quran, Rafik Goubran, Adrian D. C. Chan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrophoneComputer scienceRangingNoise (video)Identification (biology)Speech recognitionEstimatorSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Classifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)AcousticsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In paper, we propose a robust security instrument that can detect the location and identity of talker in variable noisy environment. This instrument calculates the value of the signal-to-noise (SNR) using a discrete-valued SNR estimator. This SNR value is used to adapt the performance of speech/nonspeech classifier to the surrounding noisy environment. If the detected signal is speech then a novel multi-engine talker identification (TT) will determine the identity of the talker, else an audio classification system will determine the audio type of the detected signal (e.g. widows breaking, and wind sounds). Multi-engine TI utilizes the SNR value to select the TI engine, from a set of six engines (five different SNR environments and a "clean" environment), with the SNR training condition that best matches the surrounding environment; greater TI accuracy should be achieved when training and test environments are similar. The performance of this instrument is evaluated using twelve test environments, with the SNR ranging from -10 dB to clean environment (SNR > 50 dB). The proposed instrument achieves an average classification accuracy of 92% over an SNR range of 10 dB to clean environments; an enhancement of 38% over the instrument trained in a clean environment.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207