MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095886235 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2007.402

Recognition of Phonemes In a Continuous Speech Stream By Means of PARCOR Parameter In LPC Vocoder

2007· article· en· W2095886235 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Cui, Kunio Takaya

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech recognitionLinear predictive codingComputer scienceSpeech codingVowelSpeech processingLinear predictionClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear Predictive Coding (LPC) has been used to compress and encode speech signals for digital transmission at a low bit rate. LPC determines a FIR system that predicts a speech sample from the past samples by minimizing the squared error between the actual occurrence and the estimated. The coefficients of the FIR system are encoded and sent. At the receiving end, the inverse system called AR model is excited by a random signal to reproduce the encoded speech. The use of LPC can be extended to speech recognition since the FIR coefficients are the condensed information of a speech signal of typically 10ms -30ms. PARCOR parameter associated with LPC that represents a vocal tract model based on a lattice filter structure is considered for speech recognition. The use of FIR coefficients and the frequency response of AR model were previously investigated. [1] This paper reports the method to detect a limited number of phonemes from a continuous stream of speech. A system being developed slides a time window of 16 ms and calculates the PARCOR parameters continuously, feeding them to a classifier. A classifier is a supervised classifier that requires training. The classifier uses the Maximum Likelihood Decision Rule. The training uses TIMIT speech database, which contains the recordings of 630 speakers of 8 major dialects of American English. The classification results of some typical vowel and consonant phonemes segmented from the continuous speech are listed. The vowel and consonant correct classification rate are 65.22% and 93.51%. Overall, They indicate that the PARCOR parameters have the potential capability to characterize the phonemes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207