MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7160953537 · doi:10.1121/10.0040013

Spatial room responses measured with a diversity of loudspeaker sources

2025· article· en· W7160953537 on OpenAlexaff
Wieslaw Woszczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoudspeakerImpulse responseRoom acousticsDirectivitySound pressureTransducerSuperposition principleImpulse (physics)Architectural acoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring room response using loudspeakers requires a consideration of their acoustic radiation pattern, position in each space, effective bandwidth, and dynamic range. Musical instruments produce sound output that varies considerably in directivity and complexity of room excitation. Groups of instruments and voices activate multiple room responses simultaneously from different locations. Therefore, the resulting audible outcome in a space is a spatial superposition of multiple staggered room responses developing in time, frequency, and amplitude. In a multi-year campaign measuring different indoor and outdoor spaces, impulse response experiments included room excitation by diverse electroacoustic sources built from single and multiple transducers setup to represent musical sources. An examination of the results shows that aural characteristics of rendered virtual rooms differ depending on the source excitation used. Utility of Spatial Room Impulse Responses aiming to elicit a sense of presence in an enclosure depends on choosing SRIRs that complement the direct sound of a musical source. Examples will be shown. Convolution processing using SRIRs offers the most effective perceptual transformation of sound superior to other techniques as it processes sound simultaneously in all domains: spatial, timbral, dynamic, and temporal.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→