MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W217970951

Roles of Pre-Training and Fine-Tuning in Context-Dependent DBN-HMMs for Real-World Speech Recognition

2010· article· en· W217970951 on OpenAlexaff
Dong Yu, Li Deng, George E. Dahl

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Information Processing Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionContext (archaeology)Deep belief networkVocabularyDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, deep learning techniques have been successfully applied to automatic speech recognition tasks -first to phonetic recognition with context-independent deep belief network (DBN) hidden Markov models (HMMs) and later to large vocabulary continuous speech recognition using context-dependent (CD) DBN-HMMs. In this paper, we report our most recent experiments designed to understand the roles of the two main phases of the DBN learning -pre-training and fine tuning -in the recognition performance of a CD-DBN-HMM based large-vocabulary speech recognizer. As expected, we show that pre-training can initialize weights to a point in the space where fine-tuning can be effective and thus is crucial in training deep structured models. However, a moderate increase of the amount of unlabeled pre-training data has an insignificant effect on the final recognition results as long as the original training size is sufficiently large to initialize the DBN weights. On the other hand, with additional labeled training data, the fine-tuning phase of DBN training can significantly improve the recognition accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations193
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural Information Processing SystemsSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207