<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Audio on This Might Be Something!</title><link>https://notes.danavery.com/tags/audio/</link><description>Recent content in Audio on This Might Be Something!</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 May 2025 12:27:54 -0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://notes.danavery.com/tags/audio/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Kernel Shape in a CNN Audio Model</title><link>https://notes.danavery.com/posts/2025-05-15-kernel-shape/</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2025 12:27:54 -0700</pubDate><guid>https://notes.danavery.com/posts/2025-05-15-kernel-shape/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;(Code on &lt;a href="https://github.com/danavery/kernel_shapes.git"&gt;GitHub&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Audio has a strong temporal component. Unlike an image, audio is a thing that happens in time, not an arrangement of items in a space. And yet many audio classification models treat spectrograms as if they were still images and not events, an artifact of early successes applying visual models to audio datasets.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I took the ESC-50 dataset, created a simple five-layer CNN model, and trained it with various kernel shapes and sizes. My hypothesis: &lt;strong&gt;kernels that extend more in the temporal dimension will have better performance.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>