For a fair comparison, parameter settings of PSO based methods are the same.
In order to compare robustness between the two techniques in a fair manner, parameters for each scheme should be adjusted so that watermarked audio signals of approximately close imperceptibility are produced.
To provide a fair comparison, the parameter settings of PNAE and SDRCLCE are the same.
For a fair comparison, the parameter of both schemes are chosen that they exhibit (almost) the same computational complexity.
To establish a fair comparison, the parameter values were the same for all selection schemes in the ith run. Figure 2 shows how these values are changed over time t with k=1,3,5, or 7 under the IC model.
For a fair comparison, those parameters are adaptively varied in a way that the average total power and total data rate over all four body directions are exactly the same as those in a non-adaptive system.
For a fair comparison, the parameters of the methods were optimized on auxiliary toy datasets.
In order to make a fair comparison, the parameters for the chirp signal should be chosen so that the chirp bandwidth matches the transducer bandwidth (using the same definition of Δ f as in the short pulse case), in which case we have bT = Δ f.
Such a competition would be equivalent to a simple stochastic process, in which scoring events arrive randomly, via a Poisson process with rate λ, points are awarded to each team with equal probability, as in a fair Bernoulli process with parameter c = 1 / 2, and the number of those points is an iid random variable from some sport-specific distribution.
To perform a fair comparison, the best parameters for all the algorithms are found and the experiments are performed based on these parameters.
