Auditory-model difference measures predict audible quality degradation

Related

• Measurable and audible sound qualities can be shown to correlate reliably (similarity 0.85)
• Auditory sensitivity varies nonuniformly across the frequency range (similarity 0.85)
• Perceptual auditory models will eventually replace traditional audio metrics (similarity 0.84)
• The audiogram only measures sound detection, omitting everything else about auditory perception. (similarity 0.83)
• Computational sound quality models are trained on subjective listening data (similarity 0.83)
• The audiogram normalizes hearing data so deviations from typical are visually obvious (similarity 0.83)
• High ambient noise forces listeners to raise volume toward hearing-loss levels (similarity 0.82)
• Detecting changes in auditory textures depends mainly on integration time available (similarity 0.82)
• PAQM estimates audible quality degradation by comparing specific loudness across critical bands. (similarity 0.82)
• A 1 dB detection gain can shift speech identification by 15 to 20 points (similarity 0.81)
• Hearing thresholds vary individually but share a common perceptual order (similarity 0.81)
• The auditory spectrum differs from the physical power spectrum in resolution and shape (similarity 0.81)
• All sound quality judgments derive from properties of the human auditory system. (similarity 0.81)
• Objective sound quality models have limited domains of validity and cannot replace subjective testing (similarity 0.81)
• Loudness models estimate total neural activity since it cannot be measured directly (similarity 0.80)