MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135474356 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2002.5743869

Auditory-based acoustic distinctive features and spectral cues for automatic speech recognition using a multi-stream paradigm

2002· article· en· W2135474356 on OpenAlexaff
Hesham Tolba, Sid‐Ahmed Selouani, Douglas O’Shaughnessy

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionBigramHidden Markov modelTIMITWord error rateArtificial intelligenceFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a multi-stream paradigm is proposed to improve the performance of automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems. Our goal in this paper is to improve the performance of the HMM-based ASR systems by exploiting some features that characterize speech sounds based on the auditory system and one based on the Fourier power spectrum. It was found that combining the classical MFCCs with some auditory-based acoustic distinctive cues and the main peaks of the spectrum of a speech signal using a multi-stream paradigm leads to an improvement in the recognition performance. The Hidden Markov Model Toolkit (HTK) was used throughout our experiments to test the use of the new multi-stream feature vector. A series of experiments on speaker-independent continuous-speech recognition have been carried out using a subset of the large read-speech corpus TIMIT. Using such multi-stream paradigm, N-mixture mono-/tri-phone models and a bigram language model, we found that the word error rate was decreased by about 4.01%.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations31
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal ProcessingSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207