MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2514872511

DL2 Requirements for Speech Intelligibility and Privacy in Rooms

2016· article· en· W2514872511 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Denny Ng, Murray Hodgson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntelligibility (philosophy)ReverberationAcousticsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionMathematicsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sound pressure level decay per doubling of distance (DL2) is an attractive room acoustic parameter as it, by design, bears easily understandable spatial information. Since DL2 is dependant on local geometry in addition to all room acoustics parameters, it can be viewed as an all-encapsulating metric. The theoretical study discussed in this presentation shall serve as the framework for implementation of DL2 as a universal room acoustics parameter. Target values for DL2 for unamplified talkers were investigated in rooms of varying purposes and sizes (e.g. classrooms, dining establishments, offices, study spaces). These rooms were assumed to be classifiable under one of two use purposes: (1) speech intelligibility is desired throughout the space, (2) speech intelligibility is desired until a specific distance, and speech privacy is desired thereafter. Background noise levels (BNL) and reverberation times (RT) collected in sample spaces were averaged to find representative quantities. The BNL spectra were then adjusted to match A-weighted levels prescribed by ANSI S12.2 for corresponding spaces. As ISO 9921:2002 lacks speech intelligibility index (SII) values for various intelligibility ratings, ratings were translated from the speech transmission index (STI). In turn, the SII values were assigned at typical talker-listener distances depending on intelligibility or privacy objectives. Analysis will be completed over the next month, focusing on finding the frequency-dependant DL2 values required to achieve target SII values, and assessing feasibility based on experimental data.

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)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acoustics→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→