AES E-Library

M. Torcoli, and S. Dick, "Comparing the Effect of Audio Coding Artifacts on Objective Quality Measures and on Subjective Ratings," Paper 9951, (2018 May.). doi: M. Torcoli, and S. Dick, "Comparing the Effect of Audio Coding Artifacts on Objective Quality Measures and on Subjective Ratings," Paper 9951, (2018 May.). doi:
Abstract: A recent work presented the subjective ratings from an extensive perceptual quality evaluation of audio signals, where isolated coding artifact types of varying strength were introduced. We use these ratings as perceptual reference for studying the performance of 11 well-known tools for objective audio quality evaluation: PEAQ, PEMO-Q, ViSQOLAudio, HAAQI, PESQ, POLQA, fwSNRseg, dLLR, LKR, BSSEval, and PEASS. Some tools achieve high correlation with subjective data for specific artifact types (Pearson's r > 0.90, Kendall's t > 0.70), corroborating their value during the development of a specific algorithm. Still, the performance of each tool varies depending on the artifact type and no tool reliably assesses artifacts from parametric audio coding. Nowadays, perceptual evaluation remains irreplaceable, especially when comparing different coding schemes introducing different artifacts.

@article{torcoli2018comparing,
author={torcoli, matteo and dick, sascha},
journal={journal of the audio engineering society},
title={comparing the effect of audio coding artifacts on objective quality measures and on subjective ratings},
year={2018},
volume={},
number={},
pages={},
doi={},
month={may},} @article{torcoli2018comparing,
author={torcoli, matteo and dick, sascha},
journal={journal of the audio engineering society},
title={comparing the effect of audio coding artifacts on objective quality measures and on subjective ratings},
year={2018},
volume={},
number={},
pages={},
doi={},
month={may},
abstract={a recent work presented the subjective ratings from an extensive perceptual quality evaluation of audio signals, where isolated coding artifact types of varying strength were introduced. we use these ratings as perceptual reference for studying the performance of 11 well-known tools for objective audio quality evaluation: peaq, pemo-q, visqolaudio, haaqi, pesq, polqa, fwsnrseg, dllr, lkr, bsseval, and peass. some tools achieve high correlation with subjective data for specific artifact types (pearson's r > 0.90, kendall's t > 0.70), corroborating their value during the development of a specific algorithm. still, the performance of each tool varies depending on the artifact type and no tool reliably assesses artifacts from parametric audio coding. nowadays, perceptual evaluation remains irreplaceable, especially when comparing different coding schemes introducing different artifacts.},}

TY - paper
TI - Comparing the Effect of Audio Coding Artifacts on Objective Quality Measures and on Subjective Ratings
SP - EP -
AU - Torcoli, Matteo
AU - Dick, Sascha
PY - 2018
JO - Journal of the Audio Engineering Society
IS -
VO -
VL -
Y1 - May 2018 TY - paper
TI - Comparing the Effect of Audio Coding Artifacts on Objective Quality Measures and on Subjective Ratings
SP - EP -
AU - Torcoli, Matteo
AU - Dick, Sascha
PY - 2018
JO - Journal of the Audio Engineering Society
IS -
VO -
VL -
Y1 - May 2018
AB - A recent work presented the subjective ratings from an extensive perceptual quality evaluation of audio signals, where isolated coding artifact types of varying strength were introduced. We use these ratings as perceptual reference for studying the performance of 11 well-known tools for objective audio quality evaluation: PEAQ, PEMO-Q, ViSQOLAudio, HAAQI, PESQ, POLQA, fwSNRseg, dLLR, LKR, BSSEval, and PEASS. Some tools achieve high correlation with subjective data for specific artifact types (Pearson's r > 0.90, Kendall's t > 0.70), corroborating their value during the development of a specific algorithm. Still, the performance of each tool varies depending on the artifact type and no tool reliably assesses artifacts from parametric audio coding. Nowadays, perceptual evaluation remains irreplaceable, especially when comparing different coding schemes introducing different artifacts.