基于不同数据的声景维度建模方法比较[j]。

IF 2.1 2区 物理与天体物理 Q2 ACOUSTICS Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1121/10.0034849
Siegbert Versümer, Patrick Blättermann, Fabian Rosenthal, Stefan Weinzierl
{"title":"基于不同数据的声景维度建模方法比较[j]。","authors":"Siegbert Versümer, Patrick Blättermann, Fabian Rosenthal, Stefan Weinzierl","doi":"10.1121/10.0034849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Soundscape studies vary considerably in study design, statistical methods, and model fit metrics used. Due to this confounding of data and methods, it is difficult to assess the suitability of statistical modelling techniques used in the literature. Therefore, five different methods and two performance metrics were applied to three existing soundscape datasets to model soundscape Pleasantness and Eventfulness based on seven acoustic and three sociodemographic predictors. Datasets differed in soundscape type (urban outdoor vs indoor), experimental setting (field- vs lab-based), size, and study design (site- vs person-centered). The fixed-effects and mixed-effects methods ranged from linear to nonlinear regression based on advanced machine learning approaches. Results showed that models performed better for Eventfulness than for Pleasantness in most cases, while performance as measured by the out-of-sample R2 was dependent on the total variance of the target, especially in both field studies with imbalanced targets and groups. Nonlinear methods consistently outperformed linear regression, with random forest and extreme gradient boosting performing particularly well, while the performance levels of all nonlinear methods remained comparable. Mixed-effects models provided a more generalized, albeit slightly smaller prediction performance when tested on unknown groups. Finally, this study motivates the use of cross-validation with special splitting for analyzing small imbalanced datasets.</p>","PeriodicalId":17168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Acoustical Society of America","volume":"157 1","pages":"234-255"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of methods for modeling soundscape dimensions based on different datasetsa).\",\"authors\":\"Siegbert Versümer, Patrick Blättermann, Fabian Rosenthal, Stefan Weinzierl\",\"doi\":\"10.1121/10.0034849\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Soundscape studies vary considerably in study design, statistical methods, and model fit metrics used. Due to this confounding of data and methods, it is difficult to assess the suitability of statistical modelling techniques used in the literature. Therefore, five different methods and two performance metrics were applied to three existing soundscape datasets to model soundscape Pleasantness and Eventfulness based on seven acoustic and three sociodemographic predictors. Datasets differed in soundscape type (urban outdoor vs indoor), experimental setting (field- vs lab-based), size, and study design (site- vs person-centered). The fixed-effects and mixed-effects methods ranged from linear to nonlinear regression based on advanced machine learning approaches. Results showed that models performed better for Eventfulness than for Pleasantness in most cases, while performance as measured by the out-of-sample R2 was dependent on the total variance of the target, especially in both field studies with imbalanced targets and groups. Nonlinear methods consistently outperformed linear regression, with random forest and extreme gradient boosting performing particularly well, while the performance levels of all nonlinear methods remained comparable. Mixed-effects models provided a more generalized, albeit slightly smaller prediction performance when tested on unknown groups. Finally, this study motivates the use of cross-validation with special splitting for analyzing small imbalanced datasets.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Acoustical Society of America\",\"volume\":\"157 1\",\"pages\":\"234-255\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Acoustical Society of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"101\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0034849\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ACOUSTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Acoustical Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0034849","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

声景研究在研究设计、统计方法和模型拟合指标方面差异很大。由于这种数据和方法的混淆,很难评估文献中使用的统计建模技术的适用性。因此,我们将五种不同的方法和两种性能指标应用于三个现有的声景数据集,基于七个声学和三个社会人口学预测因子来模拟声景愉悦性和事件性。数据集在声景类型(城市室外vs室内)、实验设置(现场vs实验室)、大小和研究设计(现场vs以人为中心)方面存在差异。固定效应和混合效应方法的范围从线性到非线性回归基于先进的机器学习方法。结果表明,在大多数情况下,模型对事件性的表现优于对愉悦性的表现,而由样本外R2测量的表现取决于目标的总方差,特别是在目标和组不平衡的实地研究中。非线性方法的表现始终优于线性回归,随机森林和极端梯度增强的表现特别好,而所有非线性方法的性能水平保持可比性。混合效应模型在对未知群体进行测试时提供了更广义的预测性能,尽管预测性能略小。最后,本研究鼓励使用特殊分割的交叉验证来分析小的不平衡数据集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A comparison of methods for modeling soundscape dimensions based on different datasetsa).

Soundscape studies vary considerably in study design, statistical methods, and model fit metrics used. Due to this confounding of data and methods, it is difficult to assess the suitability of statistical modelling techniques used in the literature. Therefore, five different methods and two performance metrics were applied to three existing soundscape datasets to model soundscape Pleasantness and Eventfulness based on seven acoustic and three sociodemographic predictors. Datasets differed in soundscape type (urban outdoor vs indoor), experimental setting (field- vs lab-based), size, and study design (site- vs person-centered). The fixed-effects and mixed-effects methods ranged from linear to nonlinear regression based on advanced machine learning approaches. Results showed that models performed better for Eventfulness than for Pleasantness in most cases, while performance as measured by the out-of-sample R2 was dependent on the total variance of the target, especially in both field studies with imbalanced targets and groups. Nonlinear methods consistently outperformed linear regression, with random forest and extreme gradient boosting performing particularly well, while the performance levels of all nonlinear methods remained comparable. Mixed-effects models provided a more generalized, albeit slightly smaller prediction performance when tested on unknown groups. Finally, this study motivates the use of cross-validation with special splitting for analyzing small imbalanced datasets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1433
审稿时长
4.7 months
期刊介绍: Since 1929 The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America has been the leading source of theoretical and experimental research results in the broad interdisciplinary study of sound. Subject coverage includes: linear and nonlinear acoustics; aeroacoustics, underwater sound and acoustical oceanography; ultrasonics and quantum acoustics; architectural and structural acoustics and vibration; speech, music and noise; psychology and physiology of hearing; engineering acoustics, transduction; bioacoustics, animal bioacoustics.
期刊最新文献
All we know about anechoic chambers. Temporal patterns in Malaysian rainforest soundscapes demonstrated using acoustic indices and deep embeddings trained on time-of-day estimationa). Validation of a three-dimensional model for improving the design of multiple-backscattering ultrasonic sensors. A combined noise source model based on vertical coherence to quantify the proportions of two types of noise power. A small cavity for detecting sound-induced flow.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1