Effective Technique for Noise Removal and Emotion Recognition in Speech Signals Using Cat Swarm Optimized Spiking Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech processing is one of the required fields in digital signal processing that helps in processing the speech signals. The speech process is utilized in different fields such as emotion recognition, virtual assistants, voice identification, etc. Among the various applications, emotion recognition is one of the critical areas because it is used to recognize people’s exact emotions and eliminate physiological issues. Several researchers utilize signal processing and machine learning techniques together to find the exact human emotions. However, they fail to attain their feelings with less computational complexity and high accuracy. This paper introduces the intelligent computational technique called cat swarm optimized spiking neural network (CSSPNN). Initially, the emotional speech signal is collected from the Toronto emotional speech set (TESS) dataset, which is then processed by applying a wavelet approach to extract the features. The derived features are further examined using the defined classifier CSSPNN, which recognizes human emotions due to the effective training and learning process. Finally, the proficiency of the system is determined using experimental results and discussions. The proposed system recognizes the speech emotions up to 99.3% accuracy compared to recurrent neural networks (RNNs), deep neural networks (DNNs) and deep shallow neural networks (DSNNs).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".