## 2 Description of the Proposed Method
### Description of the Proposed Automatic Evaluation System
\begin{array}{l l l}\text{EQ}_{1}:&0<\phi_{\text{FV}} \leq 90&\text{[deg]}\\ \text{EQ}_{2}:&90<\phi_{\text{FV}}\leq 180&\text{[deg]}\\ \text{EQ}_{3}:&180<\phi_{\text{FV}}\leq 270&\text{[deg]}\\ \text{EQ}_{4}:&270<\phi_{\text{FV}}\leq 360&\text{[deg]}\\ \end{array} \right. \tag{5}\]  
In all quadrants, the transformation functions \(IW_{\text{EQ1-4}}\) are defined by the weights corresponding to the angles of the quadrant center and of the quadrant borders. The complete transformation functions \(IW_{\text{EQ1-4}}\) are calculated using the linear interpolation in the angle steps of one degree. Determination of the final evaluation decision is based on the sorted sequence \(SO_{\text{TST}}(i)\) with ascending SDP values for \(N_{\text{TST}}\) tested synthesis types. To determine possible similarities in the evaluated synthesis types, the differences \(Dso\) between the sorted \(SO_{\text{TST}}\) values are calculated. Small \(Dso\) values below the threshold \(D_{\text{THRESH}}\) indicate the \"similarity\" result. The final evaluation order of three types of the synthesis method tested is then determined as:  
\[FEO=\left\{ \begin{array}{l l l}\text{ ``1''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``1''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``2''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``2''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``2''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``3''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \text{ ``3''}&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }&\text{ }\\ \end{array} \right. \tag{6}\]  
where \(Dso\)\(\chi\)-Y represents the difference between the Xth and the Yth rank in the order of sorted \(SO_{\text{TST}}\) values. The \(Dso\) can theoretically reach up to 200% for \(SO_{\text{TST}}\) values in quadrants \(\text{EQ}_{1}/\text{EQ}_{2}\) with opposite importance weighs \(1/-1\) (see Figure 1). The first rank (\"1\") denotes the maximum proximity of the tested synthesis to the original and the last rank (\"3\"--for \(N_{\text{TST}}\) = 3) represents the maximum difference between the synthesis and the original. The similarities between two or more following ranks are denoted as \"1/2\", \"2/3\"... etc. A possible notation of the obtained final result can be written as \(FEO\)(Synt1, Synt2, Synt3) = (\"2\", \"1\", \"3\") for well differentiated \(SO_{\text{TST}}\) values or \(FEO\)(Synt1, Synt2, Synt3) = (\"1/2\", \"1/2\", \"3\") for detected similarity between the first and the second evaluated synthesis types. In the first case, \(Synt2\) is the best, \(Synt3\) is the worst. The second example result means that \(Synt1\) and \(Synt2\) are similar, and \(Synt3\) is the worst. The visualization of sum vectors processing to obtain the FEO decision for two types of synthesis is shown in Figure 6.  
Figure 6: Visualization of sum vectors processing to obtain FEO decision for three types of synthesis: (**a**) localization of FV in the emotional quadrants \(\text{EQ}_{1-4}\), (**b**) bar-graph of FV magnitudes, (**c**) summary distribution parameters, (**d**) \(Dso_{1-2}\) between the 1 st–2 nd rank and FEO decision.