MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289792473 · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2022.3196562

L-Mix: A Latent-Level Instance Mixup Regularization for Robust Self-Supervised Speaker Representation Learning

2022· article· en· W4289792473 on OpenAlexafffund
Woo Hyun Kang, Jahangir Alam, Abderrahim Fathan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature learningEmbeddingSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceRegularization (linguistics)Speaker recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Supervised learningSemi-supervised learningMachine learningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the recent years, various self-supervised embedding learning methods for deep speaker verification were proposed. The performance of the self-supervised learning framework highly depends on the data augmentation technique, but due to the sensitive nature of speaker information within the speech signal, most speaker embedding training relies on simple augmentations such as additive noise or simulated reverberation. Thus while the conventional self-supervised speaker embedding systems can yield minimum within-utterance variability, their capability to generalize to out-of-set utterance is limited. In order to alleviate this problem, we investigate the utilization of the instance mix (i-mix) regularization for training a self-supervised speaker embedding system. Moreover, we propose a new mixup strategy that applies i-mix on the latent space, instead of the raw acoustic feature domain. In this paper, the i-mix and the proposed l-mix strategy were incorporated into the self-supervised angular prototypical and softmax-based objective functions and were evaluated on the VoxCeleb dataset. From the experimental results, we observe that the self-supervised embedding network can benefit greatly from the i-mix and l-mix strategies in terms of training stability and speaker verification performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal ProcessingSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207