Self-Supervised Speaker Verification Employing A Novel Clustering Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clustering is an unsupervised learning technique, which leverages a large amount of unlabeled data to learn cluster-wise representations from speech. One of the most popular self-supervised techniques to train a speaker verification system is to predict the pseudo-labels using clustering algorithms and then train the speaker embedding net-work using the generated pseudo-labels in a discriminative manner. Therefore, pseudo-labels - driven self-supervised speaker verification systems’ performance relies heavily on the accuracy of the adopted clustering algorithms. In this contribution, we propose a novel clustering technique that not only (i) combines predictions of augmented samples to provide a complementary supervisory signal for clustering and imposes symmetry within the augmentations but also (ii) enforces representation invariance via Self-Augmented Training (SAT) and maximizes the information-theoretic dependency between samples and their predicted pseudo-labels. Experimental results on the Vox-Celeb dataset show that the proposed clustering framework achieves better clustering performance in terms of a variety of clustering metrics. Proposed framework is also able to provide better self-supervised speaker verification performance than the state-of-the-art 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".