MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167402662 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2005.1415642

On Subband Adaptive Modeling of Compression Hearing Aids

2006· article· en· W2167402662 on OpenAlexaff
Michael R. Wirtzfeld, Vijay Parsa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOticon Fonden
KeywordsComputer scienceHearing aidDistortion (music)Speech recognitionAdaptive filterBroadbandNoise (video)Sound qualitySpeech enhancementElectronic engineeringAcousticsBackground noiseTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current generation of digital hearing aids perform amplitude compression in multiple channels. The resulting non-linear processing has the potential to create distortion components which reduce their effectiveness and user satisfaction. The performance of these devices is typically evaluated using subjective test procedures. While these approaches are preferred, they are time consuming. Objective electroacoustic measurements of speech quality are attractive but require effective modeling of these devices. Subband adaptive modeling architectures have been found to facilitate these measurements. It is shown that optimal modeling occurs only when the number of channels in the subband adaptive model matches the number of hearing aid channels. A technique based on combined sinusoidal and broadband noise excitation is then exploited to identify the number of channels in the hearing aid to be used in the optimal subband adaptive model.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207