MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Hybrid Neural Approach to Speaker Verification with an Improved Additive Angular Margin Loss

2025· article· W4416250889 on OpenAlexaff
Md. Jahangir Alam, Abderrahim Fathan, Md Shahidul Alam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftmax functionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkFeature extractionMargin (machine learning)Feature (linguistics)Noise (video)Speaker recognitionContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extraction of speaker embeddings plays a crucial role in the neural automatic speaker verification system. Here, we propose a novel hybrid neural embedding framework, which employs frequency- and channel-wise Selective Kernel Attention (SKA) into the 2D-CNN - based feature extraction module to aggregate global frequency-channel information to the attention weights to extract speaker discriminant embeddings. The aforementioned feature extraction module is connected with a frame-level network, which is composed of a Time Delay Neural Network (TDNN)-Long Short Term Memory hybrid network and a fully TDNN network in a cascade fashion. Multi-Level Attentive Statistics Pooling, which incorporates local statistics as context, is adopted for aggregating the speaker information within an utterance-level context by capturing the complementarity of different networks. Additionally, the proposed approach utilizes an improved Additive Angular Margin (AAM) Softmax loss function that integrates a dynamic and adaptive label noise cleansing method, termed AdaptiveDrop. This method seamlessly combines label noise filtering and correction in a cascaded manner, leveraging the strengths of both techniques to enhance robustness. Experimental results on the VoxCeleb dataset reveal that the proposed approach outperforms baseline systems in both supervised and self-supervised speaker verification tasks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designOther design
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 Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207