Fusing Visual Attention CNN and Bag of Visual Words for Cross-Corpus Speech Emotion Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech emotion recognition (SER) classifies emotions using low-level features or a spectrogram of an utterance. When SER methods are trained and tested using different datasets, they have shown performance reduction. Cross-corpus SER research identifies speech emotion using different corpora and languages. Recent cross-corpus SER research has been conducted to improve generalization. To improve the cross-corpus SER performance, we pretrained the log-mel spectrograms of the source dataset using our designed visual attention convolutional neural network (VACNN), which has a 2D CNN base model with channel- and spatial-wise visual attention modules. To train the target dataset, we extracted the feature vector using a bag of visual words (BOVW) to assist the fine-tuned model. Because visual words represent local features in the image, the BOVW helps VACNN to learn global and local features in the log-mel spectrogram by constructing a frequency histogram of visual words. The proposed method shows an overall accuracy of 83.33%, 86.92%, and 75.00% in the Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song (RAVDESS), the Berlin Database of Emotional Speech (EmoDB), and Surrey Audio-Visual Expressed Emotion (SAVEE), respectively. Experimental results on RAVDESS, EmoDB, SAVEE demonstrate improvements of 7.73%, 15.12%, and 2.34% compared to existing state-of-the-art cross-corpus SER approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".