Machine Learning--Based Parametric Audiovisual Quality Prediction Models for Real-Time Communications
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 order to mechanically predict audiovisual quality in interactive multimedia services, we have developed machine learning--based no-reference parametric models. We have compared Decision Trees--based ensemble methods, Genetic Programming and Deep Learning models that have one and more hidden layers. We have used the Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS) audiovisual quality dataset specifically designed to include ranges of parameters and degradations typically seen in real-time communications. Decision Trees--based ensemble methods have outperformed both Deep Learning-- and Genetic Programming--based models in terms of Root-Mean-Square Error (RMSE) and Pearson correlation values. We have also trained and developed models on various publicly available datasets and have compared our results with those of these original models. Our studies show that Random Forests--based prediction models achieve high accuracy for both the INRS audiovisual quality dataset and other publicly available comparable datasets.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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