A robust BFCC feature extraction for ASR system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An auditory-based feature extraction algorithm naming the Basilar-membrane Frequency-band Cepstral Coefficient (BFCC) is proposed to increase the robustness for automatic speech recognition. Compared to Fourier spectrogram based of the Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficient (MFCC) method, the proposed BFCC method engages an auditory spectrogram based on agammachirp wavelet transform to simulate the auditory response of human inner ear to improve the noise immunity. In addition, the Hidden Markov Model (HMM) is used for evaluating the proposed BFCC in phases of training and testing purposes conducted by AURORA-2 corpus with different Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNRs) degrees of datasets. The experimental results indicate the proposed BFCC, compared with MFCC, Gammatone Wavelet Cepstral Coefficient (GWCC), and Gammatone Frequency Cepstral Coefficient (GFCC), improves the speech recognition rate by 13%, 17%, and 0.5% respectively, on average given speech samples with SNRs ranging from -5 to 20 dB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".