search for: pframes

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 10:23 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > Perhaps these are simpler as > > #define __inline__ inline > #define __inline inline Currently, there are these uses of inline variants in the kernel $ git grep -w inline | wc -l 68410 $ git grep -w __inline__ | wc -l 503 $ git grep -w __inline | wc -l 57 So it seems it's also reasonable to sed all uses of __inline to

>What happens if you make SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE less >aggressive. Does it end up with too much echo or it just doesn't realise >that it's in double-talk conditions? My impression is that it does not make much difference on the timing to set this parameter less aggressive. Depending on the how loud the near end is talking it may detect double talk but most

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 10:05 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > Functions marked extern inline do not emit an externally visible > function when the gnu89 C standard is used. Some KBUILD Makefiles > overwrite KBUILD_CFLAGS. This is an issue for GCC 5.1+ users as without > an explicit C standard specified, the default is gnu11. Since c99, the > semantics of extern inline have changed

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 10:05 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > Functions marked extern inline do not emit an externally visible > function when the gnu89 C standard is used. Some KBUILD Makefiles > overwrite KBUILD_CFLAGS. This is an issue for GCC 5.1+ users as without > an explicit C standard specified, the default is gnu11. Since c99, the > semantics of extern inline have changed

Hi Jean-Marc > Can you explain what you mean here by "speech switching" By speech switching I mean the adaption of "gain2" when near-end or far-end is talking. What is important is that the timing is good and that the gain is low/high while far/near-end is talking. By timing I mean that the "gain2" should remain low until all far-end talk is final and that the

The definition of granule position for an OggDirac elementary stream isn't the same as theora. Index: tools/oggz_tools.c =================================================================== --- tools/oggz_tools.c (revision 3759) +++ tools/oggz_tools.c (working copy) @@ -454,7 +454,15 @@ iframe = granulepos >> granuleshift; pframe = granulepos - (iframe << granuleshift);

A widely used platform doesn't bother to have C99 integer types, so this allows building with it. Reported by sirlemonhead on IRC. Index: src/tools/oggz_tools.c =================================================================== --- src/tools/oggz_tools.c (revision 3827) +++ src/tools/oggz_tools.c (working copy) @@ -450,7 +450,7 @@ dg->pt = (iframe + pframe) >> 9;

Hi, I've been looking a bit at the VAD/AGC situation. I noticed a leftover variable declaration. The AGC used to use nb_loudness_adapt to count the number of frames so far, but it now uses nb_adapt which is shared by all the functions. However, it still allocates and updates nb_loudness_adapt. This patch saves 4 bytes of memory and a partial cycle of CPU power ;) -------------- next part

Hello, I have some data covering contaminant concentrations in fish over a time period of ~35 years. Each year, multiple samples of fish were taken (with varying sample sizes each year). Ultimately, I want an estimation of the variance between years, and the variance within years + random effects. I used a linear mixed model to estimate these variances, but after reading a number of different

This small patch will make st->Zlast = Zframe, to allow applications access to an estimate of the signal-to-noise level. This used to be in there earlier, but was removed when Zlast was no longer used to compute Pframe. -------------- next part -------------- Index: preprocess.c =================================================================== --- preprocess.c (revision 10007) +++

Johan Nilsson a ?crit : >> There's also a parameter to control the maximum amount of >> suppression allowed: SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_NOISE_SUPPRESS : noise >> suppression SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS : echo suppression >> when there is no local talk >> SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE: echo suppression in >> double-talk > > Yes, I am

Johan Nilsson a ?crit : >> What happens if you make SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE less >> aggressive. Does it end up with too much echo or it just doesn't realise >> that it's in double-talk conditions? > > My impression is that it does not make much difference on the timing to > set this parameter less aggressive. Depending on the how loud the

Dear friends, I hope this email finds you all well. This is the dataset I am working with: dput(random_mod12_data2) structure(list(Index = c(1L, 5L, 11L, 3L, 2L, 8L, 9L, 4L), x = c(5, 13, 25, 9, 7, 19, 21, 11), n = c(500, 500, 500, 500, 500, 500, 500, 500), r = c(100, 211, 391, 147, 122, 310, 343, 176), ratio = c(0.2, 0.422, 0.782, 0.294, 0.244, 0.62, 0.686, 0.352)), row.names = c(NA, -8L),

Hi, Here are the next two patches for the data export. speex_get_psd should be applied after speex_get_agc_gain (sent in previous mail). It allows applications to get the power spectrum for the signal and the noise estimate. speex_get_prob should be applied last. It allows fetching the speech probability of the current frame (the value that the _PROB_START and _PROB_CONTINUE parameters are

Hi, I'm wondering if the Dirac granulepos parsing in liboggz and display in the oggz tools is currently correct, as I'd like to do a release of these soon. A couple of days ago David Schleef mentioned there were some problems. David, is that currently true (ie. since David Flynn's recent updates to support Dirac), and if so could you please explain what the problems are, or point me

On 2008-11-13, Conrad Parker <conrad at metadecks.org> wrote: > I'm wondering if the Dirac granulepos parsing in liboggz and display > in the oggz tools is currently correct, as I'd like to do a release of > these soon. I believe it is -- although if correct support in the rest of the liboggz tools is required, a little more work may need to happen. > Here's some

>> I think the residual echo estimation is fairly reliable but I do not know >> how to use this to improve Pframe and in that way solve our main problem >> with the gain during near end talk. > > How can you tell that the residual echo estimation is reliable? in any > case, I suspect that the whole Pframe idea might have to be revised > (i.e. computing it completely

Dear Masters, first I'd like to wish u all a great 2011 and happy holydays by now, second (here it come the boring stuff) I have a question to which I hope u would answer: I run a logistic regression by glm(), on the following data type (y1=1,x1=x1); (y2=0,x2=x2);......(yn=0,xn=xn), where the response (y) is abinary outcome on 0,1 amd x is any explanatory variable (continuous or not)

Full_Name: Wolfgang Huber Version: 2.4.0 (2006-06-24 r38403) OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu Submission from: (NULL) (134.60.107.160) The simple example script below fails in the call to makepdf1 with "Error in eval(expr, envir, enclos) : object "p" not found" I believe this is a problem in the pdf() function, having to do with the line: lapply(Call, function(x) eval.parent(x, 2))

It was already in the process of being changed, hence the first seven lines of the function. That lapply is no longer needed and has been removed (but was not yet committed). We do normally ask that problems with R-devel ('Under development (unstable)') not be sent to R-bugs: as is quite often the case this is something that is under active development. On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Peter