MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586956420 · doi:10.1109/slt.2016.7846264

Modelling speaker and channel variability using deep neural networks for robust speaker verification

2016· article· en· W2586956420 on OpenAlexaff
Gautam Bhattacharya, Jahangir Alam, Patrick Kenn, Vishwa Gupta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityComputer Research Institute of Montréal
FundersNvidia
KeywordsSpeaker verificationComputer scienceNormalization (sociology)Word error rateSpeech recognitionSpeaker recognitionClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceDiscrete cosine transformDeep neural networks

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose to improve the performance of i-vector based speaker verification by processing the i-vectors with a deep neural network before they are fed to a cosine distance or probabilistic linear discriminant analysis (PLDA) classifier. To this end we build on an existing model that we refer to as Non-linear Within Class Normalization (NWCN) and introduce a novel Speaker Classifier Network (SCN). Both models deliver impressive speaker verification performance, showing a 56% and 68% relative improvement over standard i-vectors when combined with a cosine distance backend. The NWCN model also reduces the equal error rate for PLDA from 1.78% to 1.63%. We also test these models under the constraints of domain mismatch, i.e. when no in-domain training data is available. Under these conditions, SCN features in combination with cosine distance performs better than the PLDA baseline, achieving an equal error rate of 2.92% as compared to 3.37%.

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)0.003
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207