REVIEW 1 cited by
AccentDB: A Database of Non-Native English Accents to Assist Neural Speech Recognition
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Modern Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) technology has evolved to identify the speech spoken by native speakers of a language very well. However, identification of the speech spoken by non-native speakers continues to be a major challenge for it. In this work, we first spell out the key requirements for creating a well-curated database of speech samples in non-native accents for training and testing robust ASR systems. We then introduce AccentDB, one such database that contains samples of 4 Indian-English accents collected by us, and a compilation of samples from 4 native-English, and a metropolitan Indian-English accent. We also present an analysis on separability of the collected accent data. Further, we present several accent classification models and evaluate them thoroughly against human-labelled accent classes. We test the generalization of our classifier models in a variety of setups of seen and unseen data. Finally, we introduce the task of accent neutralization of non-native accents to native accents using autoencoder models with task-specific architectures. Thus, our work aims to aid ASR systems at every stage of development with a database for training, classification models for feature augmentation, and neutralization systems for acoustic transformations of non-native accents of English.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LLaSO: A Foundational Framework for Reproducible Research in Large Language and Speech Model
LLaSO releases a 3.8B speech-language model, 25.5M training instances, and an evaluation benchmark, claiming a normalized score of 0.72.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.