Predictive Skim: Contrastive Predictive Coding for Low-Latency Online Speech Separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In online speech separation, there is a trade-off between inherent latency and speech separation performance. When processing the current input audio, looking ahead to more future context usually brings better speech separation performance but increases the algorithm latency, and vice versa. In the requirements of extremely low latency, the future context is expensive for the algorithm latency and may not be available. In this work, we apply the contrastive predictive coding (CPC) method to the previously proposed online Skipping Memory (SkiM) speech separation model, which is a low-latency model for online speech separation. During the training stage, the SkiM model is required to predict the future memory states given the history memory. By using CPC training, the predictive SkiM model shows stronger causal sequence modeling capacity in the online speech separation task. In addition, we explore a local context codec (LCC) method to reduce the computational cost, and we make qualitative analyses on it. Our best online predictive SkiM equipped with CPC and LCC gets 15.5 dB SI-SNR improvement on WSJ02-mix benchmark with 3-ms actual latency tested on a single-core CPU, which should be the state-of-the-art results among causal models.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".