A comparison of linear and non-linear calibrations for speaker recognition

In recent work on both generative and discriminative score to log-likelihood-ratio calibration, it was shown that linear transforms give good accuracy only for a limited range of operating points. Moreover, these methods required tailoring of the calibration training objective functions in order to target the desired region of best accuracy. Here, we generalize the linear recipes to non-linear ones. We experiment with a non-linear, non-parametric, discriminative PAV solution, as well as parametric, generative, maximum-likelihood solutions that use Gaussian, Student's T and normal-inverse-Gaussian score distributions. Experiments on NIST SRE'12 scores suggest that the non-linear methods provide wider ranges of optimal accuracy and can be trained without having to resort to objective function tailoring.Comment: accepted for Odyssey 2014: The Speaker and Language Recognition Worksho

A Generative Model for Score Normalization in Speaker Recognition

We propose a theoretical framework for thinking about score normalization, which confirms that normalization is not needed under (admittedly fragile) ideal conditions. If, however, these conditions are not met, e.g. under data-set shift between training and runtime, our theory reveals dependencies between scores that could be exploited by strategies such as score normalization. Indeed, it has been demonstrated over and over experimentally, that various ad-hoc score normalization recipes do work. We present a first attempt at using probability theory to design a generative score-space normalization model which gives similar improvements to ZT-norm on the text-dependent RSR 2015 database

Generative Modelling for Unsupervised Score Calibration

Score calibration enables automatic speaker recognizers to make cost-effective accept / reject decisions. Traditional calibration requires supervised data, which is an expensive resource. We propose a 2-component GMM for unsupervised calibration and demonstrate good performance relative to a supervised baseline on NIST SRE'10 and SRE'12. A Bayesian analysis demonstrates that the uncertainty associated with the unsupervised calibration parameter estimates is surprisingly small.Comment: Accepted for ICASSP 201