MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of Voice Spoofing Detection Systems for 2019 Edition of Automatic Speaker Verification and Countermeasures Challenge

2019· article· en· W3006824058 on OpenAlexaff
João Monteiro, Jahangir Alam

Bibliographic record

Venue2019 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpoofing attackComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkSpeaker verificationSpeech recognitionMel-frequency cepstrumSpeaker recognitionArtificial intelligenceFrame (networking)BottleneckPattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)Replay attackBiometricsFeature extractionArtificial neural networkAuthentication (law)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2019 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU)Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207