A subjective listening test of six different artificial bandwidth extension approaches in English, Chinese, German, and Korean
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In studies on artificial bandwidth extension (ABE), there is a lack of international coordination in subjective tests between multiple methods and languages. Here we present the design of absolute category rating listening tests evaluating 12 ABE variants of six approaches in multiple languages, namely in American English, Chinese, German, and Korean. Since the number of ABE variants caused a higher-than-recommended length of the listening test, ABE variants were distributed into two separate listening tests per language. The paper focuses on the listening test design, which aimed at merging the subjective scores of both tests and thus allows for a joint analysis of all ABE variants under test at once. A language-dependent analysis, evaluating ABE variants in the context of the underlying coded narrowband speech condition showed statistical significant improvement in English, German, and Korean for some ABE solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it