MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538333560 · doi:10.1109/have.2004.1391880

A panoramic video and acoustic beamforming sensor for videoconferencing

2005· article· en· W2538333560 on OpenAlexaff
Mark A. Fiala, D. Green, Gerhard Roth

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBeamformingVideoconferencingComputer visionZoomVideo processingOmnidirectional antennaArtificial intelligenceMultimediaTelecommunicationsAntenna (radio)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Videoconferencing systems in use today typically rely on either fixed or pan/tilt/zoom cameras for image acquisition, and close-talking microphones for good quality audio capture. These sensors are unsuitable for scenarios involving multiple users seated at a meeting table, or non-stationary users. In these situations, the focus of attention should change from one talker to the next, and if possible track moving users. This work describes a multi-modal perception system using both video and audio signals for such a videoconferencing system. An omnidirectional video camera and an audio beamforming array are combined into a device placed in the center of a meeting table. The video and audio is processed to determine the direction of who is talking, a virtual perspective view and directional audio beam is then created. Computer vision algorithms are used to find people by motion and by face and marker detection. The audio beamformer merges the signals from a circular array of microphones to provide audio power measurements in different directions simultaneously. The video and audio cues are combined to make a decision as to the location of the talker. The system has been integrated with OpenH.323 and serves as a node using Microsoft NetMeeting.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207