Efficient Self-Attention Model for Speech Recognition-Based Assistive Robots Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assistive robots are tools that people living with upper body disabilities can leverage to autonomously perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL). Unfortunately, conventional control methods still rely on low-dimensional, easy-to-implement interfaces such as joysticks that tend to be unintuitive and cumbersome to use. In contrast, vocal commands may represent a viable and intuitive alternative. This work represents an important step toward providing a viable vocal interface for people living with upper limb disabilities by proposing a novel lightweight vocal command recognition system. The proposed model leverages the MobileNet2 architecture, augmenting it with a novel approach to the self-attention mechanism, achieving a new state-of-the-art performance for Keyword Spotting (KWS) on the Google Speech Commands Dataset (GSCD). Moreover, this work presents a new dataset, referred to as the French Speech Commands Dataset (FSCD), comprising 4963 vocal command utterances. Using the GSCD as the source, we used Transfer Learning (TL) to adapt the model to this cross-language task. TL has been shown to significantly improve the model performance on the FSCD. The viability of the proposed approach is further demonstrated through real-life control of a robotic arm by four healthy participants using both the proposed vocal interface and a joystick.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".