MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229439266 · doi:10.18280/ts.390229

New Feature Extraction Approaches Based on Spatial Points for Visual-Only Lip-Reading

2022· article· en· W4229439266 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamdullah Tung, Ramazan Teki̇n

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceReading (process)Euclidean distanceComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Feature extractionSpeech recognitionFeature vectorEuclidean geometryMathematicsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The act of speaking takes place as a result of the joint use of both the senses of vision and hearing. The visual senses of the event of speech play an important role in lip-reading, especially when the sound is distorted or inaccessible. Visual-only-based lip-reading is a more difficult problem than audio-image-based lip-reading problems. In this study, three new spatial feature approaches to visual-only lip-reading are presented. To test the proposed feature extraction approaches, three datasets named AVLetters2 consisting of letters, AVDigits consisting of digits, and AVLetAVDig consisting of a combination of these two were used. First of all, the facial elements and lips were separated and the lip borders were marked with 20 points. Then, based on these spatial points, feature vectors were obtained with the feature approaches named Symmetric Euclidean Distance (SED), Central Euclidean Distance (CED), and Triple Points Angles (TPA). Extracted feature vectors were given to the CNN-LSTM network and 26 characters and 10 digits were tried to be estimated. As a result of the findings, the best success results for AVLetters2, AVDigits, and AVLetAVDig datasets were obtained by the SED+CNN+LSTM method as 53.2, 81.6, 59.8, respectively. When compared with the studies in the literature on the same data set, it was seen that very high and successful results were obtained.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207