MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055842011 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2014.6854822

Deep neural network trained with speaker representation for speaker normalization

2014· article· en· W2055842011 on OpenAlexaff
Yun Tang, Aanchan Mohan, Richard C. Rose, Chengyuan Ma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelNormalization (sociology)Speech recognitionComputer scienceDiscriminative modelSpeaker recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionWord error rateArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceSpeaker diarisation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for speaker normalization in deep neural network (DNN) based discriminative feature estimation for automatic speech recognition (ASR) is presented. This method is applied in the context of a DNN configured for auto-encoder based low dimensional bottleneck (AE-BN) feature extraction where the derived features are used as input to a continuous Gaussian density hidden Markov model (HMM/GMM) based ASR decoder. While AE-BN features are known to provide significant reduction in ASR word error rate (WER) with respect to more conventional spectral magnitude based features, there is no general agreement on how these networks can reduce the impact of speaker variability by incorporating prior knowledge of the speaker. An approach is presented in this paper where spectrum based DNN inputs are augmented with speaker inputs that are derived from separate regression based speaker transformations. It is shown the proposed method could reduce the WER by 3% relative to the best speaker adapted AE-BN CDHMM system.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207