MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400286434 · doi:10.1121/10.0027747

Performance analysis of a dilated attention fast GAN for speech enhancement

2024· article· en· W4400286434 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Ashkani, Vijay Parsa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech enhancementSpeech recognitionAudiologyComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligenceNoise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in speech enhancement have witnessed the emergence of generator-based methodologies. However, several of these approaches exhibit complexity in handling input variations, either excelling at low signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) by utilizing intricate representations of noisy and clean speech or demonstrating superior performance only at higher SNRs. In this work, we investigated speech enhancement using a Dilated Attention Fast Generative Adversarial Network (DAF-GAN). The proposed DAF-GAN framework achieves stability in performance across different SNR conditions by efficiently processing large-scale signal lengths. The DFS-GAN features a dilated discriminator model operating via patches. The generator architecture incorporates multi-decoding and attention gates facilitated through skip-connections, strategically integrated within the Fast-U-Net model to optimize processing speed. An ideal ratio mask was used in the test phase to further refine the enhanced signal by emphasizing target speech while suppressing residual noise or artifacts. The DAF-GAN performance was assessed using objective metrics such as PESQ on a number of noisy speech databases. Results revealed that the DAF-GAN performed modestly in comparison with the state-of-the-art models. For example, analyses of the VoiceBank-DEMAND dataset yielded a PESQ score of 2.50 for the DAF-GAN.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207