Speech Emotion Recognition Using Deep Learning Techniques and Augmented Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a study on speech emotion recognition using deep learning techniques. The focus is on utilizing the Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song (RAVDESS) and the Toronto Emotional Speech Set (TESS) datasets. The proposed approach involves preprocessing the audio signals by converting them into a sequence of numbers and normalizing them using max normalization. Furthermore, the signals are augmented using three methods: noise with a 0.015 noise rate, pitch adjustment, and a combination of noise with a 0.03 noise rate and pitch adjustment. The extraction of audio features includes a combination of two features, namely Mel Frequency Cepstrum Coefficients (MFCC) and Root Mean Square (RMS) energy, which provide distinct information from each other. These features are then used to train a CNN for emotion classification. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach in accurately recognizing emotions from speech signals. The proposed approach achieves an accuracy of 93.6% on the RAVDESS dataset and 99.9% on the TESS dataset. These results highlight the potential of the proposed approach in practical applications such as speech therapy and human-computer interaction.
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) | 0.001 | 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".