Dear Steve:

Thanks a lot for your e-mail, I got database 250 and seems very helpful. I will let you know.

   The interesting point in my technique is that:

   1) the statistical test is theoretically characterized: I derived the null na non-null hypothesis (I wonder whether this sounds to you).
   2) I have the exact theoretical threshold, this is fixed theoretically not experimentally
   3) I also have what we call the power of the test.

These 3 points make it unique, that is what I think. It works very well in noisy environment (very noisy).

I think you maybe of help to judge my results, can you?

best,

Zelda

At 00:44 20/02/2008, you wrote:

KMTDBOURSE wrote:
>
>         Know that
>
>
>   (OSLEC)
>
> pretty well. Wanna test new algorithms but need wav data. Echo Cancel
> is also still under research process, VAD is part of a good echo
> canceller as it freezes the algo processing in case of double-talk.
> Generally a modified Geigel algo or energy based algo are used.
VAD and double talk are totally different problems.
>
>          I have new algorithms and want to test them. Unfortunately, I
> don't have enough data, there are out there very expensive databases
> such as (AURORA...) but don't think they are really suitable for my tests.
If you are serious about VAD testing, the TIA has a downloadable
database of hand tagged audio. If you are serious about echo
cancellation, you will start by getting your canceller through the G.168
tests, and then look at the real world test cases that fail. No
expensive databases are needed in either case. I can't imagine a
standard database even being very useful for line echo cancelller
development. You will probably want to work out the difference between
VAD and double talk first, though.

Steve

_______________________________________________
Freeswitch-dev mailing list
Freeswitch-dev@lists.freeswitch.org
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-dev
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-dev
http://www.freeswitch.org