End-to-end attention-based large vocabulary speech recognition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many state-of-the-art Large Vocabulary Continuous Speech Recognition (LVCSR) Systems are hybrids of neural networks and Hidden Markov Models (HMMs). Recently, more direct end-to-end methods have been investigated, in which neural architectures were trained to model sequences of characters [1,2]. To our knowledge, all these approaches relied on Connectionist Temporal Classification [3] modules. We investigate an alternative method for sequence modelling based on an attention mechanism that allows a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) to learn alignments between sequences of input frames and output labels. We show how this setup can be applied to LVCSR by integrating the decoding RNN with an n-gram language model and by speeding up its operation by constraining selections made by the attention mechanism and by reducing the source sequence lengths by pooling information over time. Recognition accuracies similar to other HMM-free RNN-based approaches are reported for the Wall Street Journal corpus.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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 it