MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Speech Emotion Recognition Using Hybrid Deep Learning Models

2025· article· W7143294023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Jyotiraditya Sai, N. Hari Vamsi, C. Eswara Reddy, D. Akash, Sd.Md. Jalaluddin Ansari, M. Mrudula

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep learningEmotion recognitionFeature (linguistics)Artificial neural networkFocus (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human communication conveys emotions not only through words but also through tone, rhythm, and other vocal variations. Accurately identifying these emotions using machines is challenging, especially when relying only on audio input. Speech Emotion Recognition (SER) aims to bridge this gap by analyzing speech signals to determine emotional states. In this work, we present a deep learning-based real-time SER framework that incorporates two data augmentation techniques: background noise injection and spectrogram shifting. The system is trained and tested exclusively on the Toronto Emotional Speech Set (TESS), which contains recordings of female speakers performing different emotions. To extract emotion-relevant cues, multiple acoustic descriptors are used, including Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCC), chroma features, Root Mean Square (RMS) energy, Zero-Crossing Rate (ZCR), and mel spectrograms. Three neural models were evaluated: a Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and a hybrid GRU combined with Random Forest (Bi-GRU+RF). Among these, the Bi-GRU+RF with augmentation achieved the highest accuracy, highlighting its effectiveness for speech-based emotion classification. The findings suggest that the proposed system is promising for realtime applications requiring emotion-aware interactions.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.241 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207