The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Average magnitude difference function pitch extractor
Abstract
This paper describes a method for using the average magnitude difference function (AMDF) and associated decision logic to estimate the pitch period of voiced speech sounds. The AMDF is a variation on autocorrelation analysis where, instead of correlating the input speech at various delays (where multiplications and summations are formed at each value of delay), a difference signal is formed between the delayed speech and the original and, at each delay, the absolute magnitude of the difference is taken. The difference signal is always zero at delay = π, and exhibits deep nulls at delays corresponding to the pitch period of voiced sounds. Some of the reasons the AMDF is attractive include the following. 1) It is a simple measurement which gives a good estimate of pitch contour, 2) it has no multiply operations, 3) its dynamic range characteristics are suitable for implementation on a 16-bit machine, and 4) the nature of its operations makes it suitable for implementation on a programmable processor or in special purpose hardware. The implementation of the AMDF pitch extractor (nonreal-time simulation and real-time) is described and experimental results presented to illustrate its basic measurement properties.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Speech Analysis Synthesis and Perception
Flanagan, J. L. (1972) · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-01562-9 · Cited by 1,469
Cited by
YIN, a fundamental frequency estimator for speech and music
de Cheveigné, A., & Kawahara, H. (2002) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1458024 · Cited by 1,920
Discrete time techniques for time delay estimation
Jacovitti, G., & Scarano, G. (1993) · IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/78.193195 · Cited by 433
Applications of Digital Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics
(2002) · The International Series in Engineering and Computer Science · doi:10.1007/b117882 · Cited by 278
An efficient technique for high correlation estimation
Jacovitti, G., & Cusani, R. (1987) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1987.1165195 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Ross, M., Shaffer, H., Cohen, A., Freudberg, R., & Manley, H.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing
- Published
- 1974-10
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 353-362
- ISSN
- 0096-3518 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2171321863
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Average magnitude difference function pitch extractor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tassp.1974.1162598
- The paper
- Ross, M., Shaffer, H., Cohen, A., Freudberg, R., & Manley, H. (1974). Average magnitude difference function pitch extractor. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tassp.1974.1162598
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.