MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016084804 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2013.6639015

Incoherent training of deep neural networks to de-correlate bottleneck features for speech recognition

2013· article· en· W2016084804 on OpenAlexaff
Yebo Bao, Hui Jiang, Li-Rong Dai, Cong Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelComputer scienceSpeech recognitionArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceBottleneckPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionContext (archaeology)Feature (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the hybrid model combining deep neural network (DNN) with context-dependent HMMs has achieved some dramatic gains over the conventional GMM/HMM method in many speech recognition tasks. In this paper, we study how to compete with the state-of-the-art DNN/HMM method under the traditional GMM/HMM framework. Instead of using DNN as acoustic model, we use DNN as a front-end bottleneck (BN) feature extraction method to decorrelate long feature vectors concatenated from several consecutive speech frames. More importantly, we have proposed two novel incoherent training methods to explicitly de-correlate BN features in learning of DNN. The first method relies on minimizing coherence of weight matrices in DNN while the second one attempts to minimize correlation coefficients of BN features calculated in each mini-batch data in DNN training. Experimental results on a 70-hr Mandarin transcription task and the 309-hr Switchboard task have shown that the traditional GMM/HMMs using BN features can yield comparable performance as DNN/HMM. The proposed incoherent training can produce 2-3% additional gain over the baseline BN features. At last, the discriminatively trained GMM/HMMs using incoherently trained BN features have consistently surpassed the state-of-the-art DNN/HMMs in all evaluated tasks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207