Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Emmanuel Deruty

dblp:10/8308 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Audio and music processing · 50% Image and video processing · 50%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Audio and music processing › audio analysis › audio content analysis
audio indexing
0.112010
Sound Indexing Using Morphological Description · IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 2010
Image and video processing › mathematical morphology
morphological shape representation
0.112010
Sound Indexing Using Morphological Description · IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 2010

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

mel-frequency cepstral coefficients · 0.1loudness modeling · 0.1b-spline modeling · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 Sound Indexing Using Morphological Description
abstract
Sound sample indexing usually deals with the recognition of the source/cause that has produced the sound. For abstract sounds, sound effects, unnatural, or synthetic sounds, this cause is usually unknown or unrecognizable. An efficient description of these sounds has been proposed by Schaeffer under the name morphological description. Part of this description consists in describing a sound by identifying the temporal evolution of its acoustic properties to a set of profiles. In this paper, we consider three morphological descriptions: dynamic profiles (ascending, descending, ascending/descending, stable, impulsive), melodic profiles (up, down, stable, up/down, down/up) and complex-iterative sound description (non-iterative, iterative, grain, repetition). We study the automatic indexing of a sound into these profiles. Because this automatic indexing is difficult using standard audio features, we propose new audio features to perform this task. The dynamic profiles are estimated by modeling the loudness over-time of a sound by a second-order B-spline model and derive features from this model. The melodic profiles are estimated by tracking over time the perceptual filter which has the maximum excitation. A function is derived from this track which is then modeled using a second-order B-spline model. The features are again derived from the B-spline model. The description of complex-iterative sounds is obtained by estimating the amount of repetition and the period of the repetition. These are obtained by computing an audio similarity function derived from an Mel frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC) similarity matrix. The proposed audio features are then tested for automatic classification. We consider three classification tasks corresponding to the three profiles. In each case, the results are compared with the ones obtained using standard audio features.
Geoffroy Peeters, Emmanuel Deruty
IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process.2