Audio Signal Processing Using Time-Frequency Approaches: Coding, Classification, Fingerprinting, and Watermarking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Audio signals are information rich nonstationary signals that play an important role in our day-to-day communication, perception of environment, and entertainment. Due to its non-stationary nature, time- or frequency-only approaches are inadequate in analyzing these signals. A joint time-frequency (TF) approach would be a better choice to efficiently process these signals. In this digital era, compression, intelligent indexing for content-based retrieval, classification, and protection of digital audio content are few of the areas that encapsulate a majority of the audio signal processing applications. In this paper, we present a comprehensive</p> <p>array of TF methodologies that successfully address applications in all of the above mentioned areas. A TF-based audio coding scheme with novel psychoacoustics model, music classification, audio classification of environmental sounds, audio fingerprinting, and audio watermarking will be presented to demonstrate the advantages of using time-frequency approaches in analyzing and extracting information from audio signals.</p>
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".