A software pipeline for systematizing machine learning of speech data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reproducibility and replicability of experimental findings is an essential element of the scientific process. The machine-learning community has a long-established practice of sharing data sets so that researchers can report the performance of their models on the same data. In the area of speech analysis, and more specifically speech of individuals with mental health and neurocognitive conditions, a number of such data sets exist and are the subject of organized "challenge tasks". However, as the complexity of the available relevant software libraries and their parameters increases, we argue that researchers should not only share their data but also their preprocessing and machine learning configurations so that their experiments may be fully reproduced. This is why we have designed and developed a suite of configurable software pipelines with Python Luigi for speech-data preprocessing, feature extraction, fold construction for cross-validation, machine learning training, and label prediction. These components rely on state-of-the-art software libraries, frequently used by researchers, and implement many typical tasks in this field, i.e., scikit-learn, openSMILE, LogMMSE, so that, given the configuration parameters of each task, any underlying experiments can be readily reproduced. We have evaluated our platform by replicating three different machine learning studies, with the aim of detecting depression, mild cognitive impairment, and aphasia from speech data.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.032 |
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".