Speech Emotion Recognition Based on Multiple Acoustic Features and Deep Convolutional Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech emotion recognition (SER) plays a vital role in human–machine interaction. A large number of SER schemes have been anticipated over the last decade. However, the performance of the SER systems is challenging due to the high complexity of the systems, poor feature distinctiveness, and noise. This paper presents the acoustic feature set based on Mel frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC), linear prediction cepstral coefficients (LPCC), wavelet packet transform (WPT), zero crossing rate (ZCR), spectrum centroid, spectral roll-off, spectral kurtosis, root mean square (RMS), pitch, jitter, and shimmer to improve the feature distinctiveness. Further, a lightweight compact one-dimensional deep convolutional neural network (1-D DCNN) is used to minimize the computational complexity and to represent the long-term dependencies of the speech emotion signal. The overall effectiveness of the proposed SER systems’ performance is evaluated on the Berlin Database of Emotional Speech (EMODB) and the Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song (RAVDESS) datasets. The proposed system gives an overall accuracy of 93.31% and 94.18% for the EMODB and RAVDESS datasets, respectively. The proposed MFCC and 1-D DCNN provide greater accuracy and outpace the traditional SER techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".