Verification of a Mobile Psychoacoustic Test System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many hearing difficulties can be explained as a loss of audibility, a problem easily detected and treated using standard audiological procedures. Yet, hearing can be much poorer (or more impaired) than audibility predicts because of deficits in the suprathreshold mechanisms that encode the rapidly changing, spectral, temporal, and binaural aspects of the sound. The ability to evaluate these mechanisms requires well-defined stimuli and strict adherence to rigorous psychometric principles. This project reports on the comparison between a laboratory-based and a mobile system's results for psychoacoustic assessment in adult listeners with normal hearing. A description of both systems employed is provided. Psychoacoustic tests include frequency discrimination, amplitude modulation detection, binaural encoding, and temporal gap detection. Results reported by the mobile system were not significantly different from those collected with the laboratory-based system for most of the tests and were consistent with those reported in the literature. The mobile system has the potential to be a feasible option for the assessment of suprathreshold auditory encoding abilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".