MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136836257 · doi:10.1109/89.979381

A robust compensation strategy for extraneous acoustic variations in spontaneous speech recognition

2002· article· en· W2136836257 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Jiang, Li Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelSpeech recognitionComputer scienceWord error ratePattern recognition (psychology)PronunciationBayesian probabilityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a robust compensation strategy to deal effectively with extraneous acoustic variations for spontaneous speech recognition. This strategy extends speaker adaptive training, and uses hidden Markov models (HMM) parameter transformations to normalize the extraneous variations in the training data according to a set of predefined conditions. A "compact" model and the associated prior probability density functions (PDFs) of transformation parameters are estimated using the maximum likelihood criterion. In the testing phase, the generic model and the prior PDFs are used to search for the unknown word sequence based on Bayesian prediction classification (BPC). The proposed strategy is evaluated in the switchboard task, and is used to deal with three types of extraneous variations and mismatch in conversational speech recognition: pronunciation variations, inter-speaker variability, and telephone handset mismatch. Experimental results show that moderate word error rate reduction is achieved in comparison with a well-trained baseline HMM system under identical experimental conditions.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio ProcessingSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207