MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262449442 · doi:10.1109/tmbmc.2015.2501744

An Information Theoretic Approach Toward Assessing Perceptual Audio Quality Using EEG

2015· article· en· W2262449442 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ketan Mehta, Jörg Kliewer

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Molecular Biological and Multi-Scale Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer sciencePerceptionMutual informationEntropy (arrow of time)ElectroencephalographySpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceInformation theoryAudio signalPattern recognition (psychology)Mixture modelMathematicsSpeech codingPsychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a novel information theoretic model to interpret the entire “transmission chain” comprising stimulus generation, brain processing by the human subject, and the electroencephalograph (EEG) response measurements as a nonlinear, time-varying communication channel with memory. We use mutual information (MI) as a measure to assess audio quality perception by directly measuring the brainwave responses of the human subjects using a high resolution EEG. Our focus here is on audio where the quality is impaired by time varying distortions. In particular, we conduct experiments where subjects are presented with audio whose quality varies with time between different possible quality levels. The recorded EEG measurements can be modeled as a multidimensional Gaussian mixture model (GMM). In order to make the computation of the MI feasible, we present a novel low-complexity approximation technique for the differential entropy of the multidimensional GMM. We find the proposed information theoretic approach to be successful in quantifying subjective audio quality perception, with the results being consistent across different music sequences and distortion types.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Molecular Biological and Multi-Scale CommunicationsSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207