# UaVirBASE: A Public-Access Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Sound Source Localization Dataset
## 3 Experiments
### Results
An interesting trend emerged for parameter a: a hop length overlap of 75% led to better results, indicating that a greater degree of overlap contributed to improved performance. On the other hand, when considering height, the best outcomes were observed with a 50% overlap, suggesting that the impact of the hop length's overlap may be parameter-dependent. Another key observation is that parameter d (side) achieved the highest performance when the number of Mel coefficients was set to 128. This implies that, at least for this parameter, a higher number of Mel coefficients provides a more detailed spectral representation, leading to improved results. However, when examining distance, height, and azimuth, no clear trend was identified regarding the impact of the number of Mel coefficients. The results for these parameters do not show a consistent improvement or decline as the number of coefficients changes, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions. Additionally, when analyzing the effect of frequency sample, it is not straightforward to determine whether a higher frequency consistently leads to better performance. The \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Frequency Sample Rate [kHz]**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**FFT Size**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Hop Length**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Mel Coefficients**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**MAE**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**RMSE**} \\ \cline{5-10}  & & & & **a** & **b** & **c** & **d** & **a** & **b** & **c** & **d** \\ \hline \multirow{10}{*}{44.1} & \multirow{4}{*}{1024} & \multirow{4}{*}{512} & 64 & 0.46 & 0.49 & 1.22 & 12.67 & 0.6 & 0.64 & 1.63 & 32.67 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.42 & 0.41 & 1.09 & 9.0 & 0.56 & 0.57 & 1.53 & 26.89 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.53 & 0.52 & 1.09 & 10.51 & 0.72 & 0.7 & 1.6 & 28.29 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.47 & 0.49 & 1.23 & 9.79 & 0.62 & 0.68 & 1.79 & 27.64 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.46 & 0.42 & 1.02 & 9.59 & 0.6 & 0.57 & 1.34 & 24.69 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.46 & 0.48 & 1.15 & 10.27 & 0.63 & 0.64 & 1.61 & 27.57 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.47 & 0.5 & 0.98 & 10.52 & 0.65 & 0.68 & 1.29 & 28.87 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.48 & 0.51 & 1.28 & 11.63 & 0.63 & 0.7 & 1.65 & 31.49 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.45 & 0.39 & 0.95 & 10.34 & 0.6 & 0.51 & 1.23 & 28.34 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.52 & 0.45 & 1.12 & 12.98 & 0.69 & 0.62 & 1.51 & 32.91 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.44 & 0.42 & 1.0 & 8.77 & 0.58 & 0.57 & 1.38 & 25.38 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.36 & 0.3 & 0.94 & 9.5 & 0.49 & 0.42 & 1.36 & 25.77 \\ \hline \multirow{10}{*}{96} & \multirow{4}{*}{512} & \multirow{4}{*}{1024} & \multirow{4}{*}{512} & 64 & 0.57 & 0.55 & 1.16 & 14.3 & 0.78 & 0.78 & 1.57 & 33.79 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.53 & 0.29 & 1.39 & 9.29 & 0.7 & 0.38 & 1.62 & 26.18 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.43 & 0.6 & 1.0 & 10.83 & 0.62 & 0.8 & 1.51 & 28.63 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.56 & 0.6 & 1.39 & 16.35 & 0.76 & 0.8 & 1.99 & 30.06 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.47 & 0.49 & 1.29 & 9.18 & 0.68 & 0.65 & 1.82 & 25.49 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.53 & 0.56 & 1.16 & 11.85 & 0.74 & 0.73 & 1.75 & 30.17 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.54 & 0.48 & 1.29 & 12.0 & 0.72 & 0.64 & 1.8 & 31.75 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.38 & 0.47 & 0.81 & 10.24 & 0.52 & 0.64 & 1.06 & 27.63 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.37 & 0.47 & 0.92 & 9.04 & 0.5 & 0.66 & 1.32 & 26.47 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 64 & 0.65 & 0.61 & 1.27 & 14.9 & 0.84 & 0.9 & 1.74 & 34.38 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 128 & 0.46 & 0.4 & 0.87 & 9.48 & 0.67 & 0.57 & 1.27 & 26.13 \\ \cline{3-10}  & & & 256 & 0.43 & 0.45 & 1.03 & 9.45 & 0.63 & 0.63 & 1.34 & 26.56 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Results for different Mel Spectrogram configurations. results for both frequency values are comparable, indicating that the influence of this factor is less pronounced than other parameters. The most significant factor affecting the proposed configurations appears to be the number of Mel coefficients.