Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) Systems for Children: A Systematic Literature Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic speech recognition (ASR) is one of the ways used to transform acoustic speech signals into text. Over the last few decades, an enormous amount of research work has been done in the research area of speech recognition (SR). However, most studies have focused on building ASR systems based on adult speech. The recognition of children’s speech was neglected for some time, which means that the field of children’s SR research is wide open. Children’s SR is a challenging task due to the large variations in children’s articulatory, acoustic, physical, and linguistic characteristics compared to adult speech. Thus, the field became a very attractive area of research and it is important to understand where the main center of attention is, and what are the most widely used methods for extracting acoustic features, various acoustic models, speech datasets, the SR toolkits used during the recognition process, and so on. ASR systems or interfaces are extensively used and integrated into various real-life applications, such as search engines, the healthcare industry, biometric analysis, car systems, the military, aids for people with disabilities, and mobile devices. A systematic literature review (SLR) is presented in this work by extracting the relevant information from 76 research papers published from 2009 to 2020 in the field of ASR for children. The objective of this review is to throw light on the trends of research in children’s speech recognition and analyze the potential of trending techniques to recognize 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it