MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550373130 · doi:10.1121/1.4969260

Virtual acoustics in multimedia production—Beyond enhancing the acoustics of concert halls

2016· article· en· W2550373130 on OpenAlexaff
Wieslaw Woszczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Computer scienceAcousticsHeadphonesLoudspeakerRoom acousticsReverberationImpulse responseArchitectural acousticsVirtual realityMultimediaHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper describes a range of applications of virtual acoustics, the rendering of artificial acoustic spaces, which allow musicians to interact with ambient spaces created in real time. With a number of loudspeakers suitably distributed within a physical enclosure, such a projection system can be used to introduce a range of sound fields, which may effectively transform the acoustic environment to become a creative partner in multimedia production. A necessary component in this system is a low-latency, high-resolution multichannel convolution engine that converts a live audio signal into a structured ambient response, creating a scene in real time. Scenes can be changed to suit various goals of production and sonic narration. A number of techniques have been used to capture and modify impulse responses including temporal segmentation, shaping of magnitude envelope, noise reduction, spectral enrichment, time shifting and alignment, and parallel and sequential convolution. With these methods, artists may interact with novel acoustic responses as if they were musical instruments. Artists claim that many of the familiar as well as novel acoustic responses stimulate their creativity. Flexible variable virtual acoustics opens additional creative possibilities when employed as a component of a recording studio, either directly or when rendered over headphones.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207