MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292387566 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3200166

A Novel Three Stage Framework for Person Identification From Audio Aesthetic

2022· article· en· W4292387566 on OpenAlexafffund
Fariha Iffath, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBiometricsClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceFeature extractionSet (abstract data type)Identity (music)Feature (linguistics)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social behavioral biometrics investigates social interactions to determine a person’s identity. Within the discipline of social behavioral biometrics, recognition of individuals based on their aesthetic preferences is an emerging direction of research. Human aesthetic is a soft, behavioral biometric trait that refers to a person’s attitudes towards a particular subject material. Recent developments in aesthetic-based biometric systems have proven that an individual’s visual and audio aesthetic preferences hold considerable distinctive features. This paper introduces a novel three-stage audio-aesthetic system that can uniquely identify a user from the set of their favorite songs. The system utilizes Residual Network (ResNet) for high-level feature extraction. A hybrid meta-heuristic feature selection algorithm based on Cuckoo Search and Whale Optimization is proposed for feature extraction optimization, which results in the low-dimensional feature set. The selected subset of features is fed into the XGBoost classifier to establish a person’s identity. The proposed method outperformed the handcrafted feature-based method by achieving 99.54% accuracy on a proprietary dataset (Free Music Archive) and 99.79% accuracy on a publicly available dataset (Million Playlists Dataset).

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.324
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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207