ICASSP '78. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing
DOI: 10.1109/icassp.1978.1170567
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A study of complexity and quality of speech waveform coders

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Clear reduction of speech quality is heard in comparison with original speech. Consequently, we utilize frequency-weighted segmental signal-to-noise ratio [32] to measure performance, which takes into account of phase information. Specifically, (14) where is the original noise-and reverberation-free signal, and is the processed signal.…”
Section: Results and Comparisonsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clear reduction of speech quality is heard in comparison with original speech. Consequently, we utilize frequency-weighted segmental signal-to-noise ratio [32] to measure performance, which takes into account of phase information. Specifically, (14) where is the original noise-and reverberation-free signal, and is the processed signal.…”
Section: Results and Comparisonsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the phase of the reverberant speech Φ r i could be different from the phase of reconstructed signal Φ s i , because for a spectrogram-like matrix in the time-frequency domain, it is not guaranteed there exists a time-domain signal whose STFT is equal to that matrix [25]. Thus the following DSB is not reliable, and the dereverberated signal might have relative worse performance on temporal-domain measures, like frequency-weighted segmental signal-to-noise ratio (fwSegSNR) [26].…”
Section: Dnns-dsbmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, frequency weighted segmental SNR (fwSegSNR) [26], short-time objective intelligibility (STOI) [44], and perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ) [45] were used to evaluate the system performance.…”
Section: Dnnspatialmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following four metrics were used in order to assess the audio quality of the algorithms: the signal-to-interference ratio (SIR), the so-termed "target-related" perceptual score (TPS), a frequency-weighted signal-to-noise ratio (SNRF) [17], and the "auditory" bandwidth as the counterpart of the "articulatory" bandwidth [17]. The first two metrics were computed with the PEASS toolkit [18].…”
Section: Objective Performance Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%