MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953152551 · doi:10.1109/taslp.2019.2924321

A Robust Target Linearly Constrained Minimum Variance Beamformer With Spatial Cues Preservation for Binaural Hearing Aids

2019· article· en· W2953152551 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinaural recordingRobustness (evolution)Anechoic chamberBeamformingMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorNoise (video)Direction of arrivalDistortion (music)Reverberation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a binaural beamforming algorithm for hearing aid applications is introduced. The beamforming algorithm is designed to be robust to some error in the estimate of the target speaker direction. The algorithm has two main components: a robust target linearly constrained minimum variance (TLCMV) algorithm based on imposing two constraints around the estimated direction of the target signal, and a post-processor to help with the preservation of binaural cues. The robust TLCMV provides a good level of noise reduction and low level of target distortion under realistic conditions. The post-processor enhances the beamformer abilities to preserve the binaural cues for both diffuse-like background noise and directional interferers (competing speakers), while keeping a good level of noise reduction. The introduced algorithm does not require knowledge or estimation of the directional interferers' directions nor the second-order statistics of noise-only components. The introduced algorithm requires an estimate of the target speaker direction, but it is designed to be robust to some deviation from the estimated direction. Compared with recently proposed state-of-the-art methods, comprehensive evaluations are performed under complex realistic acoustic scenarios generated in both anechoic and mildly reverberant environments, considering a mismatch between estimated and true sources direction of arrival. Mismatch between the anechoic propagation models used for the design of the beamformers and the mildly reverberant propagation models used to generate the simulated directional signals is also considered. The results illustrate the robustness of the proposed algorithm to such mismatches.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language ProcessingSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207