MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417438833 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3644961

Speech Emotion Recognition Using Cepstral Features Extracted With Gammatone Filter Banks Realized Based on ERB and Mel Frequency Scales

2025· article· en· W4417438833 on OpenAlexaffabout
N. Sugan, Lakshmi Sutha Kumar, N. S. Sai Srinivas

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsdPoint Technologies (Canada)
FundersMinistry of Electronics and Information technology
KeywordsMel-frequency cepstrumCepstrumFilter bankFilter (signal processing)Feature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speech emotion recognition (SER) involves identifying a speaker’s emotional state from their speech utterance. Prior research has explored various cepstral features for developing SER systems. Among these, Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC) and gammatone cepstral coefficients (GTCC) are widely used. MFCCs and GTCCs are extracted using Mel filter banks and gammatone filter banks (GTFB), respectively. Traditionally, GTFBs are designed based on the equivalent rectangular bandwidth scale. Alternative frequency scales can be employed to design different variants of GTFBs, yielding distinct GTCC feature variants. In this paper, a novel Mel-scale-based GTFB (GTFB-M) is introduced to extract a novel variant of GTCC features, termed GTCC-M. The mathematical framework for designing GTFB-M is presented. The proposed GTFB-M together with the conventional Mel and gammatone filter banks are used to extract three types of cepstral features from emotional speech signals in the Berlin Database of Emotional Speech (Emo-DB) and the Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song (RAVDESS). To evaluate SER performance, speaker-dependent (SD) and speaker-independent (SI) SER systems are developed using support vector machines with one-versus-one and one-versus-all strategies. The effectiveness of individual and combined cepstral features is analyzed. Experimental results show that the GTCC-M features derived from GTFB-M perform comparably to traditional MFCCs and GTCCs in emotion recognition. Moreover, combining the proposed features with the conventional cepstral features enhances the overall SER performance. In the case of the Emo-DB database, standalone GTCC-M features achieves recognition (testing) accuracies of 80.12% (SD) and 63.03% (SI). The best recognition (testing) accuracies of 88.82% (SD) and 79.17% (SI) are achieved using an optimal feature combination, i.e., MFCC + GTCC + GTCC-M, when compared to the independent use of MFCC and GTCC features. Similarly, for the RAVDESS database, standalone GTCC-M features achieves recognition (testing) accuracies of 61.84% (SD) and 40.83% (SI). The best recognition (testing) accuracies of 78.62% (SD) and 46.88% (SI) are achieved using an optimal feature combination, i.e., MFCC + GTCC + GTCC-M, when compared to the independent use of MFCC and GTCC features. These findings underscore the potential of GTCC-M features to improve the SER performance when integrated with the MFCC and GTCC features.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207