Usage of Prosody Modification and Acoustic Adaptation for Robust Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems are trained using adult speech due to the less availability of the children's speech dataset. The speech recognition rate of such systems is very less when tested using the children's speech, due to the presence of the inter-speaker acoustic variabilities between the adults and children's speech. These inter-speaker acoustic variabilities are mainly because of the higher pitch and lower speaking rate of the children. Thus, the main objective of the research work is to increase the speech recognition rate of the Punjabi-ASR system by reducing these inter-speaker acoustic variabilities with the help of prosody modification and speaker adaptive training. The pitch period and duration (speaking rate) of the speech signal can be altered with prosody modification without influencing the naturalness, message of the signal and helps to overcome the acoustic variations present in the adult's and children's speech. The developed Punjabi-ASR system is trained with the help of adult speech and prosody-modified adult speech. This prosody modified speech overcomes the massive need for children's speech for training the ASR system and improves the recognition rate. Results show that prosody modification and speaker adaptive training helps to minimize the word error rate (WER) of the Punjabi-ASR system to 8.79% when tested using children's speech.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".