MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901768138 · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2881096

Evaluation of an Arabic Speech Corpus of Emotions: A Perceptual and Statistical Analysis

2018· article· en· W2901768138 on OpenAlexaff
Ali H. Meftah, Yousef Ajami Alotaibi, Sid‐Ahmed Selouani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersDeanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University
KeywordsSadnessEmotion perceptionPerceptionPsychologyAngerEmotion classificationHappinessSurpriseSpeech recognitionDisgustSentenceComputer scienceCognitive psychologyNatural language processingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The processing of emotion has a wide range of applications in many different fields and has become the subject of increasing interest and attention for many speech and language researchers. Speech emotion recognition systems face many challenges. One of these is the degree of naturalness of the emotions in speech corpora. To prove the ability of speakers to accurately emulate emotions and to check whether listeners could identify the intended emotion, a human perception test was designed for a new emotional speech corpus. This paper presents an exhaustive statistical and perceptual investigation of the emotional speech corpus (KSUEmotions) for Arabic King Saud University approved by the Linguistic Data Consortium. The KSUEmotions corpus was built in two phases and involved 23 native speakers (10 males and 13 females) to emulate the following five emotions: neutral, sadness, happiness, surprise, and anger. Nine listeners were participated in a blind and randomly structured human perceptual test to assess the validity of the intended emotions. Statistical tests were used to analyze the effects of speaker gender, reviewer (listener) gender, emotion type, sentence length, and the interaction between these factors. Conducted statistical tests included the two-way analysis of variance, normality, chi-square, Bonferroni, Tukey, and Mann–Whitney U tests. One of the outcomes of the study is that the speaker gender, emotion type, and interaction between emotion type and speaker gender yield significant effects on the emotion perception in this corpus.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207