205 research outputs found
Very Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Robust Speech Recognition
This paper describes the extension and optimization of our previous work on
very deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for effective recognition of
noisy speech in the Aurora 4 task. The appropriate number of convolutional
layers, the sizes of the filters, pooling operations and input feature maps are
all modified: the filter and pooling sizes are reduced and dimensions of input
feature maps are extended to allow adding more convolutional layers.
Furthermore appropriate input padding and input feature map selection
strategies are developed. In addition, an adaptation framework using joint
training of very deep CNN with auxiliary features i-vector and fMLLR features
is developed. These modifications give substantial word error rate reductions
over the standard CNN used as baseline. Finally the very deep CNN is combined
with an LSTM-RNN acoustic model and it is shown that state-level weighted log
likelihood score combination in a joint acoustic model decoding scheme is very
effective. On the Aurora 4 task, the very deep CNN achieves a WER of 8.81%,
further 7.99% with auxiliary feature joint training, and 7.09% with LSTM-RNN
joint decoding.Comment: accepted by SLT 201
Comparing Human and Machine Errors in Conversational Speech Transcription
Recent work in automatic recognition of conversational telephone speech (CTS)
has achieved accuracy levels comparable to human transcribers, although there
is some debate how to precisely quantify human performance on this task, using
the NIST 2000 CTS evaluation set. This raises the question what systematic
differences, if any, may be found differentiating human from machine
transcription errors. In this paper we approach this question by comparing the
output of our most accurate CTS recognition system to that of a standard speech
transcription vendor pipeline. We find that the most frequent substitution,
deletion and insertion error types of both outputs show a high degree of
overlap. The only notable exception is that the automatic recognizer tends to
confuse filled pauses ("uh") and backchannel acknowledgments ("uhhuh"). Humans
tend not to make this error, presumably due to the distinctive and opposing
pragmatic functions attached to these words. Furthermore, we quantify the
correlation between human and machine errors at the speaker level, and
investigate the effect of speaker overlap between training and test data.
Finally, we report on an informal "Turing test" asking humans to discriminate
between automatic and human transcription error cases
Recognizing Multi-talker Speech with Permutation Invariant Training
In this paper, we propose a novel technique for direct recognition of
multiple speech streams given the single channel of mixed speech, without first
separating them. Our technique is based on permutation invariant training (PIT)
for automatic speech recognition (ASR). In PIT-ASR, we compute the average
cross entropy (CE) over all frames in the whole utterance for each possible
output-target assignment, pick the one with the minimum CE, and optimize for
that assignment. PIT-ASR forces all the frames of the same speaker to be
aligned with the same output layer. This strategy elegantly solves the label
permutation problem and speaker tracing problem in one shot. Our experiments on
artificially mixed AMI data showed that the proposed approach is very
promising.Comment: 5 pages, 6 figures, InterSpeech201
English Conversational Telephone Speech Recognition by Humans and Machines
One of the most difficult speech recognition tasks is accurate recognition of
human to human communication. Advances in deep learning over the last few years
have produced major speech recognition improvements on the representative
Switchboard conversational corpus. Word error rates that just a few years ago
were 14% have dropped to 8.0%, then 6.6% and most recently 5.8%, and are now
believed to be within striking range of human performance. This then raises two
issues - what IS human performance, and how far down can we still drive speech
recognition error rates? A recent paper by Microsoft suggests that we have
already achieved human performance. In trying to verify this statement, we
performed an independent set of human performance measurements on two
conversational tasks and found that human performance may be considerably
better than what was earlier reported, giving the community a significantly
harder goal to achieve. We also report on our own efforts in this area,
presenting a set of acoustic and language modeling techniques that lowered the
word error rate of our own English conversational telephone LVCSR system to the
level of 5.5%/10.3% on the Switchboard/CallHome subsets of the Hub5 2000
evaluation, which - at least at the writing of this paper - is a new
performance milestone (albeit not at what we measure to be human performance!).
On the acoustic side, we use a score fusion of three models: one LSTM with
multiple feature inputs, a second LSTM trained with speaker-adversarial
multi-task learning and a third residual net (ResNet) with 25 convolutional
layers and time-dilated convolutions. On the language modeling side, we use
word and character LSTMs and convolutional WaveNet-style language models
- …