MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154427806 · doi:10.1109/tasl.2010.2096213

Large-Margin Estimation of Hidden Markov Models With Second-Order Cone Programming for Speech Recognition

2010· article· en· W2154427806 on OpenAlexaff
Dalei Wu, Yan Yin, Hui Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMargin (machine learning)Hidden Markov modelConvex optimizationSpeech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Task (project management)Artificial intelligenceRegular polygonAlgorithmMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-margin estimation (LME) holds a property of good generalization on unseen test data. In our previous work, LME of HMMs has been successfully applied to some small-scale speech recognition tasks, using the SDP (semi-definite programming) technique. In this paper, we further extend the previous work by exploring a more efficient convex optimization method with the technique of second-order cone programming (SOCP). More specifically, we have studied and proposed several SOCP relaxation techniques to convert LME of HMMs in speech recognition into a standard SOCP problem so that LME can be solved with more efficient SOCP methods. The formulation is general enough to deal with various types of competing hypothesis space, such as N-best lists and word graphs. The proposed LME/SOCP approaches have been evaluated on two standard speech recognition tasks. The experimental results on the TIDIGITS task show that the SOCP method significantly outperforms the gradient descent method, and achieve comparable performance with SDP, but with 20-200 times faster speed, requiring less memory and computing resources. Furthermore, the proposed LME/SOCP method has also been successfully applied to a large vocabulary task using the Wall Street Journals (WSJ0) database. The WSJ-5k recognition results show that the proposed method yields better performance than the conventional approaches including maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE), maximum mutual information estimation (MMIE), and more recent boosted MMIE methods.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language ProcessingSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207