MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310184971 · doi:10.3390/app122312159

Arabic Emotional Voice Conversion Using English Pre-Trained StarGANv2-VC-Based Model

2022· article· en· W4310184971 on OpenAlexaff
Ali H. Meftah, Yousef Ajami Alotaibi, Sid‐Ahmed Selouani

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsProsodyComputer scienceSpeech recognitionIdentity (music)ArabicNatural language processingGenerative grammarArtificial intelligencePsychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of emotional voice conversion (EVC) is to convert the emotion of a speaker’s voice from one state to another while maintaining the original speaker’s identity and the linguistic substance of the message. Research on EVC in the Arabic language is well behind that conducted on languages with a wider distribution, such as English. The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Arabic emotions may be converted using a model trained for another language. In this work, we used an unsupervised many-to-many non-parallel generative adversarial network (GAN) voice conversion (VC) model called StarGANv2-VC to perform an Arabic EVC (A-EVC). The latter is realized by using pre-trained phoneme-level automatic speech recognition (ASR) and fundamental frequency (F0) models in the English language. The generated voice is evaluated by prosody and spectrum conversion in addition to automatic emotion recognition and speaker identification using a convolutional recurrent neural network (CRNN). The results of the evaluation indicated that male voices were scored higher than female voices and that the evaluation score for the conversion from neutral to other emotions was higher than the evaluation scores for the conversion of other emotions.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207