MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900161882 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2019.8682611

Adapting End-to-end Neural Speaker Verification to New Languages and Recording Conditions with Adversarial Training

2019· preprint· en· W2900161882 on OpenAlexaff
Gautam Bhattacharya, Jahangir Alam, Patrick Kenny

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemComputer scienceNISTSpeaker verificationSpeech recognitionTask (project management)Artificial neural networkSpeaker recognitionEmbeddingEnd-to-end principleMargin (machine learning)Artificial intelligenceTraining (meteorology)Speaker diarisationResidualCombingMachine learningAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we propose a novel approach for adapting speaker embeddings to new domains based on adversarial training of neural networks. We apply our embeddings to the task of text-independent speaker verification, a challenging, real-world problem in biometric security. We further the development of end-to-end speaker embedding models by combing a novel 1-dimensional, self-attentive residual network, an angular margin loss function and adversarial training strategy. Our model is able to learn extremely compact, 64-dimensional speaker embeddings that deliver competitive performance on a number of popular datasets using simple cosine distance scoring. One the NIST-SRE 2016 task we are able to beat a strong i-vector baseline, while on the Speakers in the Wild task our model was able to outperform both i-vector and x-vector baselines, showing an absolute improvement of 2.19% over the latter. Additionally, we show that the integration of adversarial training consistently leads to a significant improvement over an unadapted model.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207