MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tiny Noise-Robust Voice Activity Detector for Voice Assistants

2025· article· W4415524446 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Jafarzadeh Asl, Mahsa Ghazvini Nejad, Amin Edraki, Masoud Asgharian, Vahid Partovi Nia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoice activity detectionBackground noiseNoise (video)DetectorHuman voiceSpeech enhancementSIGNAL (programming language)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voice Activity Detection (VAD) in the presence of background noise remains a challenging problem in speech processing. Accurate VAD is essential in automatic speech recognition, voice-to-text, conversational agents, etc, where noise can severely degrade the performance. A modern application includes the voice assistant, specially mounted on Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT) devices such as cell phones, smart glasses, earbuds, etc, in which the voice signal includes background noise. Therefore, VAD modules must remain light-weight due to their practical on-device limitation. The existing models often struggle with low signal-tonoise ratios across diverse acoustic environments. A simple VAD often detects human voice in a clean environment, but struggles to detect the human voice in noisy conditions. We propose a noise-robust VAD that comprises a light-weight VAD, with data pre-processing and post-processing modules to handle the background noise. This approach significantly enhances the VAD accuracy in noisy environments and requires neither a larger model, nor fine-tuning. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach achieves a notable improvement compared to baselines, particularly in environments with high background noise interference. This modified VAD additionally improves clean speech detection.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207