MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114394575 · doi:10.3390/s21010074

Binaural Heterophasic Superdirective Beamforming

2020· article· en· W3114394575 on OpenAlexaff
Yuzhu Wang, Jingdong Chen, Jacob Benesty, Jilu Jin, Gongping Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinaural recordingBeamformingAcousticsMonauralWhite noiseComputer scienceNoise (video)PsychoacousticsCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)SIGNAL (programming language)Speech recognitionTelecommunicationsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The superdirective beamformer, while attractive for processing broadband acoustic signals, often suffers from the problem of white noise amplification. So, its application requires well-designed acoustic arrays with sensors of extremely low self-noise level, which is difficult if not impossible to attain. In this paper, a new binaural superdirective beamformer is proposed, which is divided into two sub-beamformers. Based on studies and facts in psychoacoustics, these two filters are designed in such a way that they are orthogonal to each other to make the white noise components in the binaural beamforming outputs incoherent while maximizing the output interaural coherence of the diffuse noise, which is important for the brain to localize the sound source of interest. As a result, the signal of interest in the binaural superdirective beamformer's outputs is in phase but the white noise components in the outputs are random phase, so the human auditory system can better separate the acoustic signal of interest from white noise by listening to the outputs of the proposed approach. Experimental results show that the derived binaural superdirective beamformer is superior to its conventional monaural counterpart.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207