Combining Transformer, Convolutional Neural Network, and Long Short-Term Memory Architectures: A Novel Ensemble Learning Technique That Leverages Multi-Acoustic Features for Speech Emotion Recognition in Distance Education Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech emotion recognition (SER) is a technology that can be applied to distance education to analyze speech patterns and evaluate speakers’ emotional states in real time. It provides valuable insights and can be used to enhance students’ learning experiences by enabling the assessment of their instructors’ emotional stability, a factor that significantly impacts the effectiveness of information delivery. Students demonstrate different engagement levels during learning activities, and assessing this engagement is important for controlling the learning process and improving e-learning systems. An important aspect that may influence student engagement is their instructors’ emotional state. Accordingly, this study used deep learning techniques to create an automated system for recognizing instructors’ emotions in their speech when delivering distance learning. This methodology entailed integrating transformer, convolutional neural network, and long short-term memory architectures into an ensemble to enhance the SER. Feature extraction from audio data used Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients; chroma; a Mel spectrogram; the zero-crossing rate; spectral contrast, centroid, bandwidth, and roll-off; and the root-mean square, with subsequent optimization processes such as adding noise, conducting time stretching, and shifting the audio data. Several transformer blocks were incorporated, and a multi-head self-attention mechanism was employed to identify the relationships between the input sequence segments. The preprocessing and data augmentation methodologies significantly enhanced the precision of the results, with accuracy rates of 96.3%, 99.86%, 96.5%, and 85.3% for the Ryerson Audio–Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song, Berlin Database of Emotional Speech, Surrey Audio–Visual Expressed Emotion, and Interactive Emotional Dyadic Motion Capture datasets, respectively. Furthermore, it achieved 83% accuracy on another dataset created for this study, the Saudi Higher-Education Instructor Emotions dataset. The results demonstrate the considerable accuracy of this model in detecting emotions in speech data across different languages and datasets.
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 | 0.001 | 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".