MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067459736 · doi:10.1002/ecjb.10119

Model‐based speaker normalization methods for speech recognition

2003· article· en· W2067459736 on OpenAlexaff
Masaki Naito, Li Deng, Yoshinori Sagisaka

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics and Communications in Japan (Part II Electronics) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocal tractFormantNormalization (sociology)Speech recognitionComputer scienceSpeaker recognitionSmoothingSpeaker diarisationImage warpingPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A speaker normalization method using a speech generation model is proposed in order to achieve high‐performance speaker adaptation with a small amount of adaptation data. The speaker‐ and phoneme‐dependent vocal tract area function is approximated by the corresponding area function produced by the articulatory model of a standard speaker, combined with phoneme‐independent feature quantities of the vocal‐tract shape of the normalized target speaker as estimated from the formant frequencies of two vowels. The frequency warping functions are determined from the formant frequencies of speech calculated from the vocal‐tract area functions thus obtained, and normalization of the uttered speech is performed by stretching the speech spectrum in the frequency‐axis direction. Continuous phoneme recognition experiments using phoneme connection rules show that the recognition error using a gender‐dependent model is reduced by about 30% in the proposed method and that recognition performance superior to that of vocal‐tract length normalization is obtained. The recognition performance of the proposed method is also equivalent to that of speaker adaptation by moving vector field smoothing (VFS) using 10 phonetically balanced sentences, showing that high‐performance speaker adaptation using a small amount of adaptation data can be achieved by the proposed method. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Electron Comm Jpn Pt 2, 86(2): 45–56, 2003; Published online in Wiley InterScience ( www.interscience.wiley.com ). DOI 10.1002/ecjb.10119

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronics and Communications in Japan (Part II Electronics)Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207