Multi-lingual speech recognition with low-rank multi-task deep neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-task learning (MTL) for deep neural network (DNN) multilingual acoustic models has been shown to be effective for learning parameters that are common or shared between multiple languages[1, 2]. In the MTL paradigm, the number of parameters in the output layer is large and scales with the number of languages used in training. This output layer becomes a computational bottleneck. For mono-lingual DNNs, low-rank matrix factorization (LRMF) of weight matrices have yielded large computational savings[3, 4]. The LRMF proposed in this work for MTL, is for the original languagespecific block matrices to “share” a common matrix, with resulting low-rank language specific block matrices. The impact of LRMF is presented in two scenarios, namely : (a) improving performance in a target language when auxiliary languages are included during multi-lingual training; and (b) cross-language transfer to an unseen language with only 1 hour of transcribed training data. A 44% parameter reduction in the final layer, manifests itself in providing a lower memory footprint and faster training times. An experimental study shows that the LRMF multi-lingual DNN provides competitive performance compared to a full-rank multi-lingual DNN in both scenarios.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".