On the Use of Cross-module Attention Statistics Pooling for Speaker Verification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In deep learning-based speaker verification frameworks, extraction of a speaker embedding vector plays a key role. In this contribution, we propose a hybrid neural network that employs a cross-module attention pooling mechanism for the extraction of speaker discriminant utterance-level embeddings. In particular, the proposed system incorporates a 2D-Convolution Neural Network (CNN)-based feature extraction module in cascade with a frame-level network, which is composed of a fully Time Delay Neural Network (TDNN) network and a TDNN-Long Short Term Memory (TDNN-LSTM) hybrid network in a parallel manner. The proposed system also employs cross-module attention statistics pooling for aggregating the speaker information within an utterance-level context by capturing the complementarity between two parallelly connected modules. We conduct a set of experiments on the Voxceleb corpus for evaluating the performance of the proposed system and the proposed hybrid network is able to provide better results than the conventional approaches trained on the same 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".