MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045302321 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.13703

From Sound Representation to Model Robustness

2020· preprint· en· W3045302321 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Esmaeilpour

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceSpectrogramPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMel-frequency cepstrumSpeech recognitionConvolutional neural networkResidualShort-time Fourier transformDiscrete wavelet transformFeature extractionWaveletFourier transformWavelet transformMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate the impact of different standard environmental sound representations (spectrograms) on the recognition performance and adversarial attack robustness of a victim residual convolutional neural network. Averaged over various experiments on three benchmarking environmental sound datasets, we found the ResNet-18 model outperforms other deep learning architectures such as GoogLeNet and AlexNet both in terms of classification accuracy and the number of training parameters. Therefore we set this model as our front-end classifier for subsequent investigations. Herein, we measure the impact of different settings required for generating more informative mel-frequency cepstral coefficient (MFCC), short-time Fourier transform (STFT), and discrete wavelet transform (DWT) representations on our front-end model. This measurement involves comparing the classification performance over the adversarial robustness. On the balance of average budgets allocated by adversary and the cost of attack, we demonstrate an inverse relationship between recognition accuracy and model robustness against six attack algorithms. Moreover, our experimental results show that while the ResNet-18 model trained on DWT spectrograms achieves the highest recognition accuracy, attacking this model is relatively more costly for the adversary compared to other 2D representations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.087 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207