Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Emmanuel Deruty
dblp:10/8308
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Audio and music processing › audio analysis › audio content analysis
audio indexing |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Sound Indexing Using Morphological Description · IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 2010 |
Image and video processing › mathematical morphology
morphological shape representation |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | Sound Indexing Using Morphological DescriptionabstractSound 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 |