MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165088481 · doi:10.1109/icassp.1981.1171129

Text-independent speaker recognition using orthogonal linear prediction

2005· article· en· W2165088481 on OpenAlexaff
M. Shridhar, N. Mohankrishnan, M. Baraniecki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear predictionSpeech recognitionComputer scienceSpeaker recognitionSet (abstract data type)Speaker verificationPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Feature selectionTest setFeature extractionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this work was to investigate the effectiveness of long-term averages of the orthogonal linear prediction parameters in text-independent speaker recognition. To investigate the possibility of feature selection, a technique using dynamic programming (1) was used to select a subset of k best features among the entire set N. The results indicate that the parameters comprising the optimal set chosen are speaker-dependedt. Verification accuracies of 96.5% were obtained using the selected optimal 8- parameter (out of 12) feature set for each speaker in a verification scheme, in which the reference parameters were generated from 100 seconds of time-spaced voiced speech and the test parameters were generated from 5 seconds of voiced speech.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.211 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207