MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409431765 · doi:10.3390/acoustics7020020

A Z-Test-Based Evaluation of a Least Mean Square Filter for Noise Reduction

2025· article· en· W4409431765 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcoustics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsReduction (mathematics)Noise reductionNoise (video)MathematicsStatisticsFilter (signal processing)Square (algebra)Chi-square testAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation using a Z-test to assess the effectiveness of an adaptive Least Mean Squares (LMS) filter driven by the Steepest Descent Method (SDM). The study utilizes a male voice recording, captured in a controlled studio environment, to which persistent Gaussian noise was intentionally introduced, simulating real-world interference. All signal processing methods were implemented accordingly in MATLAB.version: 9.13.0 (R2022b), Natick, MA, USA: The MathWorks Inc.; 2022. The adaptive filter demonstrated a significant improvement of 20 dB in Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) following the initial optimization of the filter parameter μ. To further assess the LMS filter’s performance, an empirical experiment was conducted with 30 young adults, aged between 20 and 30 years, who were tasked with qualitatively distinguishing between the clean and noise-corrupted signals (blind test). The quantitative analysis and statistical evaluation of the participants’ responses revealed that a significant majority, specifically 80%, were able to reliably identify the noise-affected and filtered signals. This outcome highlights the LMS filter’s potential—despite the slow convergence of the SDM—for enhancing signal clarity in noise-contaminated environments, thus validating its practical application in speech processing and noise reduction.

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.314 · 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