MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980041360 · doi:10.1109/embc.2019.8857889

Comparison of Silence Removal Methods for the Identification of Audio Cough Events

2019· article· en· W2980041360 on OpenAlexaff
Madison Cohen-McFarlane, Rafik Goubran, Frank Knoefel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceNoise (video)Term (time)Artificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensing technologies are embedded in our everyday lives. Smart homes typically use an Audio Virtual Assistant (AVA) (e.g. Alexa, Siri, and Google Home) interface that collects sensor information, which can provide security, assist in everyday activities and monitor health related information. One such measure is cough, changes of which can be a marker of worsening conditions for many respiratory diseases. Creating a reliable monitoring system utilizing technology that may already be present in the home (i.e. AVA) may provide an opportunity for early intervention and reductions in the number of long-term hospitalizations. This paper focuses on the optimization of the silence removal and segmentation step in an at home setting with low to moderate background noise to identify cough events. Three commonly used methods (Standard deviation (SD), Short-term Energy (SE), Zero-crossing rate (ZCR)) were compared to manual segmentations. Each method was applied to 209 audio files that were manually verified to contain at least one cough event and the average segmentation accuracy, over segmentation and under segmentation results were compared. The ZCR method had the highest accuracy (89%); however, it completely failed under moderate noise conditions. The SD method had the best combination of accuracy (86%), ability to perform under noisy conditions and low prevalence of over and under segmentation (22% and 15% respectively). Therefore, we recommend using an adaptive approach to silence removal among cough events based on the level of background noise (i.e use the ZCR method when the background noise is low and the SD method when it is higher) prior to implementation of a cough classification system.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.408 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207