Subject: Re: Roots of the term "gammatone" From: Tamas Harczos <tamas.harczos@xxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 21:35:01 +0200 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>Dick, I absolutely agree with your conclusion. Tamas "Richard F. Lyon" schrieb: > Tamas, > > I recounted some of those mis-attributions in > http://dicklyon.com/tech/Hearing/APGF_Lyon_1996.pdf > and concluded: > > Aertsen and Johannesma [AJ80] appear to have coined the catchy name; > referring to the envelope, they said: > > The form m(t) appears both as the integrand in the definition > of the Gamma function $\Gamma(g)$ and as the density function > of the Gamma distribution, therefore we propose to use ... the > term "Gamma-tone" or "$\gamma$-tone." > > ... The non-hyphenated "gammatone," as an adjective modifying > "filter," appears to be due to Patterson et al. [P88]. > > Dick > > > > > At 10:05 AM +0200 3/28/12, Tamas Harczos wrote: >>Dear List, >> >>I am looking for the first time use of the term "gammatone". Flanagan >>('65), Johannesma and de Boer ('72,'75) did not use that term. Patterson >>et al. write in their '88 APU report "An efficient auditory filterbank >>based on the gammatone function" that "Johannesma (1972) used this >>function to summarize revcor data, although he did not refer to it as >>the gammatone function, and the function was not fitted to revcor data. >>The name appears to have been adopted by de Boer and de Jongh (1978)". >>However, I am not able to find the term "gammatone" in the de Boer and >>de Jongh paper "On cochlear encoding: Potentialities and limitations of >>the reverse-correlation technique" JASA 63(1), 1978. >> >>Any ideas? >>Thanks! >>Tamas >> >>-- >>*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* >>Dipl.-Ing. Tamás Harczos >>PhD Student >>Institute for Media Technology >>Faculty of Electr. Eng. and Inf. Techn. >>Ilmenau University of Technology >>Tel.: +49 3677 467 225 >>Fax.: +49 3677 467 4225 >>E-Mail: tamas.harczos@xxxxxxxx >>*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*