MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810490977 · doi:10.1109/isspit.2017.8388669

Speech emotion recognition on mobile devices based on modulation spectral feature pooling and deep neural networks

2017· article· en· W2810490977 on OpenAlexafffund
Anderson R. Avila, João Monteiro, Douglas O'Shaughneussy, Tiago H. Falk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionReverberationMultilayer perceptronArtificial neural networkPoolingNoise (video)Artificial intelligenceSpectrogramFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningBackground noiseFeature (linguistics)AcousticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the problem of speech emotion recognition (SER) in-the-wild is addressed. A new modulation spectral feature pooling scheme is proposed to mitigate the detrimental effects of background noise. On top of these features, two DNN-based architectures are tested for the prediction of arousal and valence emotional primitives: a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) and a recurrent neural network based on Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM). Experiments are conducted using the RECOLA dataset of spontaneous interactions. In order to simulate data collected in-the-wild, the clean speech files were corrupted with different levels of background noise and room impulse responses collected using a mobile device. Both stationary and non-stationary noise types (fan and babble) were considered in our experiments. Three distinct scenarios were explored: noise only, reverberation only and noise-plus-reverberation. Experimental results have shown that, in most of the scenarios, the proposed SER system achieved better performance in terms of concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) compared to the benchmark algorithm described in the 2016 Audio/Visual Emotion Challenge. The proposed feature system also showed to be more robust when noise-plus-reverberation is considered.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207