MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nonlinearity-Robust Linear Acoustic Echo Canceller Using the Maximum Correntropy Criterion

2019· article· en· W3006878099 on OpenAlexafffund
Hocine Merabti, Daniel Massicotte, Wei‐Ping Zhu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Adaptive filterAlgorithmComputer scienceLeast mean squares filterNonlinear systemClipping (morphology)Mean squared errorOutlierEstimatorControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the problem of acoustic echo cancellation (AEC) with nonlinear distortions, we propose to use a linear adaptive filter that maximizes the Correntropy similarity measure instead of the conventional minimization of the mean squared error (MSE) criterion. The maximum Correntropy criterion (MCC) offers robustness to outliers and impulsive noise, which is interesting for the case of speech signal coupled with nonlinearities. To assess the performance of the algorithm, we consider a hard-clipping memoryless saturation nonlinearity. Our simulation results show very interesting performance of the normalized MCC-based linear adaptive filter for the echo return loss enhancement (ERLE) and misalignment measures compared to the MSE-based normalized least mean squares (NLMS) approach. Furthermore, the NMCC adaptive filter has a similar computational complexity as the NLMS algorithm, which makes it very attractive in practical implementations.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207