MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410840149 · doi:10.1007/s11042-025-20930-y

Evaluating raw waveforms with deep learning frameworks for speech emotion recognition

2025· article· en· W4410840149 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMultimedia Tools and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEmotion recognitionSpeech recognitionWaveformDeep learningArtificial intelligenceNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Speech emotion recognition is a challenging task in speech processing field. For this reason, feature extraction process has a crucial importance to demonstrate and process the speech signals. In this work, we represent a model, which feeds raw audio files directly into the deep neural networks without any feature extraction stage for the recognition of emotions utilizing six different data sets, namely, The Berlin Database of Emotional Speech (EMO-DB), Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song (RAVDESS), Toronto Emotional Speech Database (TESS), Crowd-sourced Emotional Multimodal Actors (CREMA), Surrey Audio-Visual Expressed Emotion (SAVEE), and TESS+RAVDESS. To demonstrate the contribution of proposed model, the performance of traditional feature extraction techniques namely, mel-scale spectogram, mel-frequency cepstral coefficients, are blended with machine learning algorithms, ensemble learning methods, deep and hybrid deep learning techniques. Support vector machine, decision tree, naive Bayes, random forests models are evaluated as machine learning algorithms while majority voting and stacking methods are assessed as ensemble learning techniques. Moreover, convolutional neural networks, long short-term memory networks, and hybrid CNN-LSTM model are evaluated as deep learning techniques and compared with machine learning and ensemble learning methods. To demonstrate the effectiveness of proposed model, the comparison with state-of-the-art studies are carried out. Based on the experiment results, CNN model excels existent approaches with 95.86% of accuracy for TESS+RAVDESS data set using raw audio files, thence determining the new state-of-the-art. The proposed model performs 90.34% of accuracy for EMO-DB with CNN model, 90.42% of accuracy for RAVDESS with CNN model, 99.48% of accuracy for TESS with LSTM model, 69.72% of accuracy for CREMA with CNN model, 85.76% of accuracy for SAVEE with CNN model in speaker-independent audio categorization problems.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.285 · 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