Biomedical subjects

Mark D Skowronski

Publications and source records attributed to Mark D Skowronski.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Prediction of intrauterine pressure from electrohysterography using optimal linear filtering.

We propose a method of predicting intrauterine pressure (IUP) from external electrohysterograms (EHG) using a causal FIR Wiener filter. IUP and 8-channel EHG data were collected simultaneously from 14 laboring patients at term, and prediction models were trained and tested using 10-min windows for each patient and channel. RMS prediction error varied between 5-14 mmHg across all patients. We performed a 4-way analysis of variance on the RMS error, which varied across patients, channels, time (test window) and model (train window). The patient-channel interaction was the most significant factor while channel alone was not significant, indicating that different channels produced significantly different RMS errors depending on the patient. The channel-time factor was significant due to single-channel bursty noise, while time was a significant factor due to multichannel bursty noise. The time-model interaction was not significant, supporting the assumption that the random process generating the IUP and EHG signals was stationary. The results demonstrate the capabilities of optimal linear filter in predicting IUP from external EHG and offer insight into the factors that affect prediction error of IUP from multichannel EHG recordings.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2006

Acoustic detection and classification of Microchiroptera using machine learning: lessons learned from automatic speech recognition.

Current automatic acoustic detection and classification of microchiroptera utilize global features of individual calls (i.e., duration, bandwidth, frequency extrema), an approach that stems from expert knowledge of call sonograms. This approach parallels the acoustic phonetic paradigm of human automatic speech recognition (ASR), which relied on expert knowledge to account for variations in canonical linguistic units. ASR research eventually shifted from acoustic phonetics to machine learning, primarily because of the superior ability of machine learning to account for signal variation. To compare machine learning with conventional methods of detection and classification, nearly 3000 search-phase calls were hand labeled from recordings of five species: Pipistrellus bodenheimeri, Molossus molossus, Lasiurus borealis, L. cinereus semotus, and Tadarida brasiliensis. The hand labels were used to train two machine learning models: a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) for detection and classification and a hidden Markov model (HMM) for classification. The GMM detector produced 4% error compared to 32% error for a baseline broadband energy detector, while the GMM and HMM classifiers produced errors of 0.6 +/- 0.2% compared to 16.9 +/- 1.1% error for a baseline discriminant function analysis classifier. The experiments showed that machine learning algorithms produced errors an order of magnitude smaller than those for conventional methods.

Acoustics↗

PubMed2004

Exploiting independent filter bandwidth of human factor cepstral coefficients in automatic speech recognition.

Mel frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC) are the most widely used speech features in automatic speech recognition systems, primarily because the coefficients fit well with the assumptions used in hidden Markov models and because of the superior noise robustness of MFCC over alternative feature sets such as linear prediction-based coefficients. The authors have recently introduced human factor cepstral coefficients (HFCC), a modification of MFCC that uses the known relationship between center frequency and critical bandwidth from human psychoacoustics to decouple filter bandwidth from filter spacing. In this work, the authors introduce a variation of HFCC called HFCC-E in which filter bandwidth is linearly scaled in order to investigate the effects of wider filter bandwidth on noise robustness. Experimental results show an increase in signal-to-noise ratio of 7 dB over traditional MFCC algorithms when filter bandwidth increases in HFCC-E. An important attribute of both HFCC and HFCC-E is that the algorithms only differ from MFCC in the filter bank coefficients: increased noise robustness using wider filters is achieved with no additional computational cost.

Algorithms↗