Silent Speech Interfaces for Speech Restoration: A Review

This work was supported in part by the Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI) under Grant PID2019-108040RB-C22/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. The work of Jose A. Gonzalez-Lopez was supported in part by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under Juan de la Cierva-Incorporation Fellowship (IJCI-2017-32926).This review summarises the status of silent speech interface (SSI) research. SSIs rely on non-acoustic biosignals generated by the human body during speech production to enable communication whenever normal verbal communication is not possible or not desirable. In this review, we focus on the first case and present latest SSI research aimed at providing new alternative and augmentative communication methods for persons with severe speech disorders. SSIs can employ a variety of biosignals to enable silent communication, such as electrophysiological recordings of neural activity, electromyographic (EMG) recordings of vocal tract movements or the direct tracking of articulator movements using imaging techniques. Depending on the disorder, some sensing techniques may be better suited than others to capture speech-related information. For instance, EMG and imaging techniques are well suited for laryngectomised patients, whose vocal tract remains almost intact but are unable to speak after the removal of the vocal folds, but fail for severely paralysed individuals. From the biosignals, SSIs decode the intended message, using automatic speech recognition or speech synthesis algorithms. Despite considerable advances in recent years, most present-day SSIs have only been validated in laboratory settings for healthy users. Thus, as discussed in this paper, a number of challenges remain to be addressed in future research before SSIs can be promoted to real-world applications. If these issues can be addressed successfully, future SSIs will improve the lives of persons with severe speech impairments by restoring their communication capabilities.Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI) PID2019-108040RB-C22/AEI/10.13039/501100011033Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under Juan de la Cierva-Incorporation Fellowship IJCI-2017-3292

Subject-independent acoustic-to-articulatory mapping of fricative sounds by using vocal tract length normalization

This paper presents an acoustic-to-articulatory (AtoA) mapping method for tracking the movement of the critical articulators on fricative utterances. The proposed approach applies a vocal tract length normalization process. Subsequently, those acoustic time-frequency features better related to movement of articulators from the statistical perspective are used for AtoA mapping. We test this method on the MOCHA-TIMIT database, which contains signals from an electromagnetic articulograph system. The proposed features were tested on an AtoA mapping system based on Gaussian mixture models, where Pearson correlation coeffi cient is used to measure the goodness of estimates. Correlation value between the estimates and reference signals shows that subject-independent AtoA mapping with proposed approach yields comparable results to subject-dependent AtoA mapping

A Silent-Speech Interface using Electro-Optical Stomatography

Sprachtechnologie ist eine große und wachsende Industrie, die das Leben von technologieinteressierten Nutzern auf zahlreichen Wegen bereichert. Viele potenzielle Nutzer werden jedoch ausgeschlossen: Nämlich alle Sprecher, die nur schwer oder sogar gar nicht Sprache produzieren können. Silent-Speech Interfaces bieten einen Weg, mit Maschinen durch ein bequemes sprachgesteuertes Interface zu kommunizieren ohne dafür akustische Sprache zu benötigen. Sie können außerdem prinzipiell eine Ersatzstimme stellen, indem sie die intendierten Äußerungen, die der Nutzer nur still artikuliert, künstlich synthetisieren. Diese Dissertation stellt ein neues Silent-Speech Interface vor, das auf einem neu entwickelten Messsystem namens Elektro-Optischer Stomatografie und einem neuartigen parametrischen Vokaltraktmodell basiert, das die Echtzeitsynthese von Sprache basierend auf den gemessenen Daten ermöglicht. Mit der Hardware wurden Studien zur Einzelworterkennung durchgeführt, die den Stand der Technik in der intra- und inter-individuellen Genauigkeit erreichten und übertrafen. Darüber hinaus wurde eine Studie abgeschlossen, in der die Hardware zur Steuerung des Vokaltraktmodells in einer direkten Artikulation-zu-Sprache-Synthese verwendet wurde. Während die Verständlichkeit der Synthese von Vokalen sehr hoch eingeschätzt wurde, ist die Verständlichkeit von Konsonanten und kontinuierlicher Sprache sehr schlecht. Vielversprechende Möglichkeiten zur Verbesserung des Systems werden im Ausblick diskutiert.:Statement of authorship iii Abstract v List of Figures vii List of Tables xi Acronyms xiii 1. Introduction 1 1.1. The concept of a Silent-Speech Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Structure of this work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Fundamentals of phonetics 7 2.1. Components of the human speech production system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2. Vowel sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. Consonantal sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4. Acoustic properties of speech sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5. Coarticulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.6. Phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.7. Summary and implications for the design of a Silent-Speech Interface (SSI) . . . . . . . 21 3. Articulatory data acquisition techniques in Silent-Speech Interfaces 25 3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.2. Scope of the literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.3. Video Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.4. Ultrasonography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.5. Electromyography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.6. Permanent-Magnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3.7. Electromagnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.8. Radio waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.9. Palatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.10.Conclusion and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4. Electro-Optical Stomatography 55 4.1. Contact sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2. Optical distance sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.3. Lip sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4.4. Sensor Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 4.5. Control Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.6. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5. Articulation-to-Text 99 5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.2. Command word recognition pilot study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.3. Command word recognition small-scale study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6. Articulation-to-Speech 109 6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.2. Articulatory synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.3. The six point vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.4. Objective evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.5. Perceptual evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 6.6. Direct synthesis using EOS to control the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 6.7. Pitch and voicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7. Summary and outlook 145 7.1. Summary of the contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 7.2. Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 A. Overview of the International Phonetic Alphabet 151 B. Mathematical proofs and derivations 153 B.1. Combinatoric calculations illustrating the reduction of possible syllables using phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 B.2. Signal Averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.3. Effect of the contact sensor area on the conductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.4. Calculation of the forward current for the OP280V diode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 C. Schematics and layouts 157 C.1. Schematics of the control unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 C.2. Layout of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 C.3. Bill of materials of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 C.4. Schematics of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 C.5. Layout of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 C.6. Bill of materials of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 D. Sensor unit assembly 169 E. Firmware flow and data protocol 177 F. Palate file format 181 G. Supplemental material regarding the vocal tract model 183 H. Articulation-to-Speech: Optimal hyperparameters 189 Bibliography 191Speech technology is a major and growing industry that enriches the lives of technologically-minded people in a number of ways. Many potential users are, however, excluded: Namely, all speakers who cannot easily or even at all produce speech. Silent-Speech Interfaces offer a way to communicate with a machine by a convenient speech recognition interface without the need for acoustic speech. They also can potentially provide a full replacement voice by synthesizing the intended utterances that are only silently articulated by the user. To that end, the speech movements need to be captured and mapped to either text or acoustic speech. This dissertation proposes a new Silent-Speech Interface based on a newly developed measurement technology called Electro-Optical Stomatography and a novel parametric vocal tract model to facilitate real-time speech synthesis based on the measured data. The hardware was used to conduct command word recognition studies reaching state-of-the-art intra- and inter-individual performance. Furthermore, a study on using the hardware to control the vocal tract model in a direct articulation-to-speech synthesis loop was also completed. While the intelligibility of synthesized vowels was high, the intelligibility of consonants and connected speech was quite poor. Promising ways to improve the system are discussed in the outlook.:Statement of authorship iii Abstract v List of Figures vii List of Tables xi Acronyms xiii 1. Introduction 1 1.1. The concept of a Silent-Speech Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Structure of this work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Fundamentals of phonetics 7 2.1. Components of the human speech production system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2. Vowel sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. Consonantal sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4. Acoustic properties of speech sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5. Coarticulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.6. Phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.7. Summary and implications for the design of a Silent-Speech Interface (SSI) . . . . . . . 21 3. Articulatory data acquisition techniques in Silent-Speech Interfaces 25 3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.2. Scope of the literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.3. Video Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.4. Ultrasonography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.5. Electromyography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.6. Permanent-Magnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3.7. Electromagnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.8. Radio waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.9. Palatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.10.Conclusion and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4. Electro-Optical Stomatography 55 4.1. Contact sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2. Optical distance sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.3. Lip sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4.4. Sensor Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 4.5. Control Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.6. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5. Articulation-to-Text 99 5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.2. Command word recognition pilot study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.3. Command word recognition small-scale study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6. Articulation-to-Speech 109 6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.2. Articulatory synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.3. The six point vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.4. Objective evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.5. Perceptual evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 6.6. Direct synthesis using EOS to control the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 6.7. Pitch and voicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7. Summary and outlook 145 7.1. Summary of the contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 7.2. Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 A. Overview of the International Phonetic Alphabet 151 B. Mathematical proofs and derivations 153 B.1. Combinatoric calculations illustrating the reduction of possible syllables using phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 B.2. Signal Averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.3. Effect of the contact sensor area on the conductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.4. Calculation of the forward current for the OP280V diode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 C. Schematics and layouts 157 C.1. Schematics of the control unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 C.2. Layout of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 C.3. Bill of materials of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 C.4. Schematics of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 C.5. Layout of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 C.6. Bill of materials of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 D. Sensor unit assembly 169 E. Firmware flow and data protocol 177 F. Palate file format 181 G. Supplemental material regarding the vocal tract model 183 H. Articulation-to-Speech: Optimal hyperparameters 189 Bibliography 19

Speaker Independent Acoustic-to-Articulatory Inversion

Acoustic-to-articulatory inversion, the determination of articulatory parameters from acoustic signals, is a difficult but important problem for many speech processing applications, such as automatic speech recognition (ASR) and computer aided pronunciation training (CAPT). In recent years, several approaches have been successfully implemented for speaker dependent models with parallel acoustic and kinematic training data. However, in many practical applications inversion is needed for new speakers for whom no articulatory data is available. In order to address this problem, this dissertation introduces a novel speaker adaptation approach called Parallel Reference Speaker Weighting (PRSW), based on parallel acoustic and articulatory Hidden Markov Models (HMM). This approach uses a robust normalized articulatory space and palate referenced articulatory features combined with speaker-weighted adaptation to form an inversion mapping for new speakers that can accurately estimate articulatory trajectories. The proposed PRSW method is evaluated on the newly collected Marquette electromagnetic articulography - Mandarin Accented English (EMA-MAE) corpus using 20 native English speakers. Cross-speaker inversion results show that given a good selection of reference speakers with consistent acoustic and articulatory patterns, the PRSW approach gives good speaker independent inversion performance even without kinematic training data

Articulatory Copy Synthesis Based on the Speech Synthesizer VocalTractLab

Articulatory copy synthesis (ACS), a subarea of speech inversion, refers to the reproduction of natural utterances and involves both the physiological articulatory processes and their corresponding acoustic results. This thesis proposes two novel methods for the ACS of human speech using the articulatory speech synthesizer VocalTractLab (VTL) to address or mitigate the existing problems of speech inversion, such as non-unique mapping, acoustic variation among different speakers, and the time-consuming nature of the process. The first method involved finding appropriate VTL gestural scores for given natural utterances using a genetic algorithm. It consisted of two steps: gestural score initialization and optimization. In the first step, gestural scores were initialized using the given acoustic signals with speech recognition, grapheme-to-phoneme (G2P), and a VTL rule-based method for converting phoneme sequences to gestural scores. In the second step, the initial gestural scores were optimized by a genetic algorithm via an analysis-by-synthesis (ABS) procedure that sought to minimize the cosine distance between the acoustic features of the synthetic and natural utterances. The articulatory parameters were also regularized during the optimization process to restrict them to reasonable values. The second method was based on long short-term memory (LSTM) and convolutional neural networks, which were responsible for capturing the temporal dependence and the spatial structure of the acoustic features, respectively. The neural network regression models were trained, which used acoustic features as inputs and produced articulatory trajectories as outputs. In addition, to cover as much of the articulatory and acoustic space as possible, the training samples were augmented by manipulating the phonation type, speaking effort, and the vocal tract length of the synthetic utterances. Furthermore, two regularization methods were proposed: one based on the smoothness loss of articulatory trajectories and another based on the acoustic loss between original and predicted acoustic features. The best-performing genetic algorithms and convolutional LSTM systems (evaluated in terms of the difference between the estimated and reference VTL articulatory parameters) obtained average correlation coefficients of 0.985 and 0.983 for speaker-dependent utterances, respectively, and their reproduced speech achieved recognition accuracies of 86.25% and 64.69% for speaker-independent utterances of German words, respectively. When applied to German sentence utterances, as well as English and Mandarin Chinese word utterances, the neural network based ACS systems achieved recognition accuracies of 73.88%, 52.92%, and 52.41%, respectively. The results showed that both of these methods not only reproduced the articulatory processes but also reproduced the acoustic signals of reference utterances. Moreover, the regularization methods led to more physiologically plausible articulatory processes and made the estimated articulatory trajectories be more articulatorily preferred by VTL, thus reproducing more natural and intelligible speech. This study also found that the convolutional layers, when used in conjunction with batch normalization layers, automatically learned more distinctive features from log power spectrograms. Furthermore, the neural network based ACS systems trained using German data could be generalized to the utterances of other languages

Extending the Cascaded Gaussian Mixture Regression Framework for Cross-Speaker Acoustic-Articulatory Mapping

International audienceThis article addresses the adaptation of an acoustic-articulatory inversion model of a reference speaker to the voice of another source speaker, using a limited amount of audio-only data. In this study, the articulatory-acoustic relationship of the reference speaker is modeled by a Gaussian mixture model and inference of articulatory data from acoustic data is made by the associated Gaussian mixture regression (GMR). To address speaker adaptation, we previously proposed a general framework called Cascaded-GMR (C-GMR) which decomposes the adaptation process into two consecutive steps: spectral conversion between source and reference speaker and acoustic-articulatory inversion of converted spectral trajectories. In particular, we proposed the Integrated C-GMR technique (IC-GMR) in which both steps are tied together in the same probabilistic model. In this article, we extend the C-GMR framework with another model called Joint-GMR (J-GMR). Contrary to the IC-GMR, this model aims at exploiting all potential acoustic-articulatory relationships, including those between the source speaker's acoustics and the reference speaker's articulation. We present the full derivation of the exact Expectation-Maximization (EM) training algorithm for the J-GMR. It exploits the missing data methodology of machine learning to deal with limited adaptation data. We provide an extensive evaluation of the J-GMR on both synthetic acoustic-articulatory data and on the multi-speaker MOCHA EMA database. We compare the J-GMR performance to other models of the C-GMR framework, notably the IC-GMR, and discuss their respective merits

Cortical encoding and decoding models of speech production

To speak is to dynamically orchestrate the movements of the articulators (jaw, tongue, lips, and larynx), which in turn generate speech sounds. It is an amazing mental and motor feat that is controlled by the brain and is fundamental for communication. Technology that could translate brain signals into speech would be transformative for people who are unable to communicate as a result of neurological impairments. This work first investigates how articulator movements that underlie natural speech production are represented in the brain. Building upon this, this work also presents a neural decoder that can synthesize audible speech from brain signals. Data to support these results were from direct cortical recordings of the human sensorimotor cortex while participants spoke natural sentences. Neural activity at individual electrodes encoded a diversity of articulatory kinematic trajectories (AKTs), each revealing coordinated articulator movements towards specific vocal tract shapes. The neural decoder was designed to leverage the kinematic trajectories encoded in the sensorimotor cortex which enhanced performance even with limited data. In closed vocabulary tests, listeners could readily identify and transcribe speech synthesized from cortical activity. These findings advance the clinical viability of using speech neuroprosthetic technology to restore spoken communication

Articulatory-based Speech Processing Methods for Foreign Accent Conversion

The objective of this dissertation is to develop speech processing methods that enable without altering their identity. We envision accent conversion primarily as a tool for pronunciation training, allowing non-native speakers to hear their native-accented selves. With this application in mind, we present two methods of accent conversion. The first assumes that the voice quality/identity of speech resides in the glottal excitation, while the linguistic content is contained in the vocal tract transfer function. Accent conversion is achieved by convolving the glottal excitation of a non-native speaker with the vocal tract transfer function of a native speaker. The result is perceived as 60 percent less accented, but it is no longer identified as the same individual. The second method of accent conversion selects segments of speech from a corpus of non-native speech based on their acoustic or articulatory similarity to segments from a native speaker. We predict that articulatory features provide a more speaker-independent representation of speech and are therefore better gauges of linguistic similarity across speakers. To test this hypothesis, we collected a custom database containing simultaneous recordings of speech and the positions of important articulators (e.g. lips, jaw, tongue) for a native and non-native speaker. Resequencing speech from a non-native speaker based on articulatory similarity with a native speaker achieved a 20 percent reduction in accent. The approach is particularly appealing for applications in pronunciation training because it modifies speech in a way that produces realistically achievable changes in accent (i.e., since the technique uses sounds already produced by the non-native speaker). A second contribution of this dissertation is the development of subjective and objective measures to assess the performance of accent conversion systems. This is a difficult problem because, in most cases, no ground truth exists. Subjective evaluation is further complicated by the interconnected relationship between accent and identity, but modifications of the stimuli (i.e. reverse speech and voice disguises) allow the two components to be separated. Algorithms to measure objectively accent, quality, and identity are shown to correlate well with their subjective counterparts

Modeling of oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation to compensate for the acoustic effects of nasalization

Hypernasality is one of the most detrimental speech disturbances that lead to declines of speech intelligibility. Velopharyngeal inadequacy, which is associated with anatomic defects such as cleft palate or neuromuscular disorders that affect velopharygneal function, is the primary cause of hypernasality. A simulation study by Rong and Kuehn [J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 55(5), 1438–1448 (2012)] demonstrated that properly adjusted oropharyngeal articulation can reduce nasality for vowels synthesized with an articulatory model [Mermelstein, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 53(4), 1070–1082 (1973)]. In this study, a speaker-adaptive articulatory model was developed to simulate speaker-customized oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation to compensate for the acoustic effects of nasalization on /a/, /i/, and /u/. The results demonstrated that (1) the oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation effectively counteracted the effects of nasalization on the second lowest formant frequency (F2) and partially compensated for the effects of nasalization on vowel space (e.g., shifting and constriction of vowel space) and (2) the articulatory adaptation strategies generated by the speaker-adaptive model might be more efficacious for counteracting the acoustic effects of nasalization compared to the adaptation strategies generated by the standard articulatory model in Rong and Kuehn. The findings of this study indicated the potential of using oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation as a means to correct maladaptive articulatory behaviors and to reduce nasalit