Speech emotion recognition with light gradient boosting decision trees machine
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
<p>Speech emotion recognition aims to identify the emotion expressed in the speech by analyzing the audio signals. In this work, data augmentation is first performed on the audio samples to increase the number of samples for better model learning. The audio samples are comprehensively encoded as the frequency and temporal domain features. In the classification, a light gradient boosting machine is leveraged. The hyperparameter tuning of the light gradient boosting machine is performed to determine the optimal hyperparameter settings. As the speech emotion recognition datasets are imbalanced, the class weights are regulated to be inversely proportional to the sample distribution where minority classes are assigned higher class weights. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method outshines the state-of-the-art methods with 84.91% accuracy on the emo-DB dataset, 67.72% on the Ryerson audio-visual database of emotional speech and song (RAVDESS) dataset, and 62.94% on the interactive emotional dyadic motion capture (IEMOCAP) dataset.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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