MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186897582 · doi:10.1109/icjece.2021.3075373

Empirical Mode Decomposition for Analysis and Filtering of Speech Signals

2021· article· en· W3186897582 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Usman, Mohammed Zubair, Hany S. Hussein, Mohd Wajid, Mohammed Farrag, Syed Jaffar Ali, Mohammad Shiblee, Mohammed Sayeeduddin Habeeb

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Khalid University
KeywordsHilbert–Huang transformSpeech recognitionSpeech processingComputer scienceInterval (graph theory)Stationary processMode (computer interface)SIGNAL (programming language)Context (archaeology)PiecewiseSignal processingNonlinear systemMathematicsFilter (signal processing)TelecommunicationsPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speech signals typically have a stationary interval of 20-30 ms. Due to this, most speech processing techniques split speech signals into segments shorter than the stationary interval to take advantage of the piecewise stationary property of speech. However, there is no way to guarantee that the segments coincide with the stationary timescales inherent in the signal. Furthermore, how do we analyze speech signals over lengths longer than the stationary time scales? Second, there is evidence of the presence of nonlinearities in speech data from the published literature. In this article, the analysis of speech signals, without restriction to stationary time scales, using empirical mode decomposition (EMD) is presented in which the signal is broken down into components called intrinsic mode functions. EMD is especially suited for nonstationary and nonlinear data. The utility of this method, its effects, and opportunities for further research in the context of speech signals are presented.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207