Development of Voice Spoofing Detection Systems for 2019 Edition of Automatic Speaker Verification and Countermeasures Challenge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A robust speaker verification system is expected to provide high recognition accuracy not only in adverse environments but also in the presence of spoofing attacks, which renders voice spoofing detection as crucial to prevent automatic speaker verification systems from a security breach. In this work, we present anti-spoofing systems developed for tackling spoofing attacks introduced for the ASVspoof 2019 challenge. We employ frame-level descriptors such as discrete Fourier transform, as well as constant Q transform-based spectral and cepstral features as countermeasures. These descriptors are both used on their own with a spoofing detection classifier to detect spoofing attacks, or in tandem with deep bottleneck features, i.e. approximate posteriors parametrized by a neural network designed to discriminate between bonafide and spoof signals. Fisher vector encoding and i-vector representations are further learned from the frame-level descriptors of the signals. For modeling, we employ two classification strategies. We finally build an end-to-end anti-spoofing system by making use of modified versions of light convolution neural networks as well as well-known ResNets. Our primary system for the logical access task and a single end-to-end system for the case of physical access we attain significant improvements over two baseline systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
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".