MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917932809 · doi:10.1121/1.5091777

An in-ear speech database in varying conditions of the audio-phonation loop

2019· article· en· W2917932809 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachel Bouserhal, Antoine Bernier, Jérémie Voix

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology
KeywordsComputer scienceQUIETPhonationSpeech productionSpeech recognitionEar canalDatabaseSpeech processingNoise (video)AcousticsAudiologyArtificial intelligenceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rise of hearables and the advantages of using in-ear microphones with intra-aural devices, accessibility to an in-ear speech database in adverse conditions is essential. Speech captured inside the occluded ear is limited in its frequency bandwidth and has an amplified low frequency content. In addition, occluding the ear canal affects speech production, especially in noisy environments. These changes to speech production have a detrimental effect on speech-based algorithms. Yet, to the authors' knowledge, there are no speech databases that account for these changes. This paper presents a speech-in-ear database, of speech captured inside an occluded ear in noise and in quiet. The database is bilingual (in French and in English) and is intended to aid researchers in developing algorithms for intra-aural devices utilizing in-ear microphones.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207