MASV: Speaker Verification with Global and Local Context Mamba

Florian Metze; Li Wan; Ming Sun; Yang Liu; Yangyang Shi; Yiteng Huang

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

MASV: Speaker Verification with Global and Local Context Mamba

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Putting Mamba state-space layers inside ECAPA-TDNN improves speaker-verification accuracy while cutting computational cost.

desk verdict Plausible Mamba-into-ECAPA architecture with a real efficiency angle, but the evidence is a single self-inconsistent report on a private set; worth a round of revision, not a pass. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10989 v1 pith:6EXSS7VO submitted 2024-12-14 eess.AS cs.SD

Yang Liu , Li Wan , Yiteng Huang , Ming Sun , Yangyang Shi , Florian Metze This is my paper · ORCID

classification eess.AScs.SD

keywords speakerverificationMambastatespacemodelECAPA-TDNNlocalcontextbidirectionalstreamingcomputationalefficiency

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that swapping the convolutional Res2 blocks of the ECAPA-TDNN speaker-verification network for two new Mamba-based blocks makes verification both more accurate and cheaper to run. The proposed MASV model uses a Local Context Bidirectional Mamba (LCB-Mamba) block to capture local patterns in streaming audio without waiting for future frames, and a Tri-Mamba block that merges local context with global context across audio buffers. On the authors' private 5.18-million-utterance studio dataset, MASV (C=1024) reaches an equal error rate of 0.795 and minDCF 0.0998, slightly beating PCF-ECAPA at 0.801 and 0.1092 while using fewer FLOPS. The paper positions this as a step toward real-time speaker verification on constrained devices such as VR headsets and smart glasses.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing components are the LCB-Mamba block and the Tri-Mamba block. LCB-Mamba processes each audio buffer by running a forward Mamba layer and a backward Mamba layer that use only the current buffer's local context, so streaming inference never needs future input; the two directions' hidden states are concatenated. Tri-Mamba then wraps an LCB-Mamba in a Conv1D-ReLU-BN projection and adds a second Mamba layer plus a squeeze-and-excitation block, letting the model bind local buffer-level features into a global representation. The full-scale skip connections add input-to-output elementwise shortcuts across the network.

What would settle it

Train MASV and PCF-ECAPA (C=1024) multiple times with the same data and protocol, or evaluate both on a public benchmark; if the EER difference shrinks to within run-to-run variance or reverses, the accuracy claim is falsified, while the FLOPS-based efficiency claim would remain.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Mamba selective state-space model can be dropped into the well-established ECAPA-TDNN framework to solve the long-sequence modeling problem in speaker verification. The authors introduce two architectural replacements: LCB-Mamba, which maintains a local context window in each streaming buffer and runs forward and backward Mamba passes without using future frames, and Tri-Mamba, which stacks a Conv1D projection, the LCB-Mamba block, a second Mamba layer, and a squeeze-and-excitation recalibration to combine local and global context. Full-scale skip connections tie the layers together. On the reported evaluation, MASV outperforms ECAPA-TDNN and PCF-ECAPA at the same channel widths on equal error rate and minimum detection cost, and the 1024-channel variant uses lower FLOPS than its PCF-ECAPA counterpart. The authors conclude that this architecture is an effective and efficient solution for dynamic real-world environments.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that MASV is more accurate than its baselines rests on the assumption that the reported equal-error-rate and minDCF numbers from a single private, studio-recorded dataset with no significance testing are stable enough to distinguish a 0.795 from a 0.801 EER.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Streaming speaker verification can run with bidirectional-style context using only already-received audio, so MASV is directly deployable in buffer-by-buffer real-time settings.
Substituting Mamba-based blocks for Res2 dilated CNNs preserves or improves accuracy in the reported setting, suggesting CNNs' limited receptive field was the main bottleneck in this task.
The lower FLOPS at equal channels means the accuracy gain is not bought with compute; the model is more efficient than a matching PCF-ECAPA at C=1024.
The architecture can be trained with the same loss, pooling, and optimization setup as ECAPA-based baselines, so adopting it requires no new training infrastructure.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Because the only comparison is against models trained on the same private dataset without significance testing, the accuracy edge (0.795 vs 0.801 EER) may be within run-to-run variance; the efficiency advantage (FLOPS) is the more robust claim.
The LCB-Mamba design generalizes beyond speaker verification: any streaming sequence task that currently uses bidirectional RNNs or temporal convolutions could adopt the same local-window bidirectional mechanism.
A natural testable extension is to evaluate MASV on public benchmarks like VoxCeleb2 with the same protocol; the paper explicitly avoids that dataset on data-quality grounds, leaving transferability open.
The reported minDCF discrepancy between Table 1 (0.0998) and Table 2 (0.0875) for the complete MASV C=1024 suggests either different evaluation conditions or instability; a reader should check which number is reproducible.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

MASV is a reasonable engineering idea: take ECAPA-TDNN, swap the Res2 blocks for a Mamba-based block with a local-context forward path and a separate global path, and add full-scale skips. That combination is new relative to the cited literature, and the efficiency claim has some support — MASV at C=1024 is reported at 6.2G FLOPs versus PCF-ECAPA’s higher compute, with parameter counts in the same ballpark. I think the architecture is worth a look for streaming/edge speaker verification.

The problem is the evidence. All numbers come from one private studio-filtered dataset, with no error bars, no repeated runs, no public benchmark, and no code release. The gap over the strongest baseline is tiny (EER 0.795 vs 0.801 at C=1024; minDCF 0.0998 vs 0.1092). That could be real, but with a single evaluation protocol it is not established. The stress-test note is right about the tables: Complete MASV in Table 2 is described as being built on the 512-channel base, but its EER matches the 1024-channel row, and its minDCF (0.0875) matches neither row. The authors need to explain what configuration Table 2 actually reports. Equations 3 and 4 also cannot be reimplemented as written: they refer to a “local context” vector c that is never defined, and one of them literally says “Mamaba”. These are fixable, but they undercut the paper’s reproducibility.

The paper does earn some credit: the motivation for local context without future information is clearly stated, the ablation at least shows monotone gains from each component (though on the same private set), and the compute comparison is useful. The references are relevant; I do not see a citation-pattern problem.

My bottom line: this is a plausible incremental architecture, not a record result and not a new phenomenon. If the authors can clear up the table inconsistency, define the local-context mechanism, and add at least one public benchmark or repeated-seed intervals, I would send it to referees. Without those, the “substantially enhances” claim in the abstract is unsupported. I would not cite it in my own work until the numbers are confirmable. Bring it to reading group only if someone wants a case study in how private-data evaluation can hide metric instability.

Recommendation: conditional peer review — send back for revision and verification, not a flat accept, and not a desk reject if the authors are willing to engage.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MASV, a speaker-verification architecture that integrates Mamba state-space layers into the ECAPA-TDNN framework. The two main innovations are the Local Context Bidirectional Mamba (LCB-Mamba) block, intended to capture local context within audio buffers without using future information in streaming settings, and the Tri-Mamba block, which combines local and global context by adding a Mamba layer over the LCB-Mamba output. Full-scale skip connections are also introduced. The authors evaluate on a private, geographically filtered studio dataset, comparing against ResNet, ECAPA, and PCF-ECAPA baselines. They report that MASV achieves the lowest EER and minDCF among the compared systems while also having lower FLOPs than PCF-ECAPA at the same channel width.

Significance. If the reported results are reliable, the paper makes a useful contribution to streaming speaker verification: the idea of a causally constrained bidirectional Mamba is interesting, and the efficiency comparison against PCF-ECAPA is relevant to real-time applications. The paper also provides an ablation study showing the contribution of each component. However, the significance is currently undermined by an undefined architectural term, an internal inconsistency between the two main result tables, and the lack of any statistical uncertainty or public benchmark. The 0.795-versus-0.801 EER difference that grounds the main superiority claim is too small to be convincing from a single run on a private dataset.

major comments (3)

[§3.1, Eqs. (3)–(4)] The local context vector c (both the forward c and the backward c) is never defined. Equations (3) and (4) are therefore not a specification of the LCB-Mamba block: the reader cannot determine how c is constructed, what its window size is, or what its dimensionality is. This makes the architecture impossible to reimplement from the text and prevents verification of the central causal claim (that the block depends only on current and past input within the buffer). Please define c precisely for both directions, and also correct the typo 'Mamaba' in Eq. (3).
[§4.3, Tables 1 and 2] The same configuration is reported with different numbers in the two tables. Table 2 describes 'Complete MASV' as built from the 512-channel Base Model (6.2M params, 9.2M total), so it should correspond to the MASV (C=512) row of Table 1. Yet Table 2 reports EER 0.795 and minDCF 0.0875 for Complete MASV, while Table 1 reports EER 0.805 and minDCF 0.1025 for MASV (C=512); the Table 2 EER instead matches the MASV (C=1024) row, and its minDCF matches neither row. Please reconcile the two tables, state the exact configuration of each row, and report the variance across repeated runs or seeds so the reader can judge whether the differences are meaningful.
[§4.1 and §4.3] All conclusions rest on a single, unreleased private dataset with no confidence intervals, multiple-seed runs, significance tests, or public benchmark. The claimed improvement over PCF-ECAPA (C=1024) is 0.006 EER absolute (0.795 vs. 0.801). This difference is within the typical run-to-run variability of speaker-verification training, and the observed inconsistency between Tables 1 and 2 reinforces the concern that the metrics are not stable at this resolution. Please provide repeated-seed statistics or evaluate on a public benchmark so that the abstract's 'substantially enhances' claim is supported by evidence beyond a single private run.

minor comments (5)

[Fig. 2] The caption is incomplete: it reads 'Computational Complexity Comparison on' and ends abruptly. Please complete the sentence.
[Table 2] The 'Params' column does not indicate its unit; presumably the numbers are in millions, but this should be stated explicitly.
[§4.2] The phrase 'a cyclical learning rate strategy over 100k-step cycles' is ambiguous about how many cycles are run; please specify the total number of training steps and the cycle schedule.
[References] Reference [4] has the title 'V ot: Revolutionizing speaker verification with memory and attention mechanisms'; the spacing in 'V ot' appears to be a typo and should be corrected.
[§4.2 and §4.4] The paper compares only with ResNet, ECAPA, and PCF-ECAPA. Since Mamba-based models are increasingly used for speaker verification, adding a comparison with at least one other Mamba-based SV model would help contextualize the claimed advantage.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: MASV superiority claims are empirical evaluations, not derived predictions; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper makes no analytic predictions and presents no derivation chain that could collapse into its inputs. The MASV architecture is defined, trained, and measured; the EER and minDCF values in Tables 1 and 2 are experimental outcomes, not quantities derived from Eqs. (3)-(4) or from a fitted parameter. The load-bearing claim of 'substantially enhances verification performance' rests on a single private dataset with no significance testing, and Tables 1 and 2 are internally inconsistent for the same configuration (minDCF 0.0875 vs 0.0998/0.1025). Those are correctness and reproducibility concerns, not circularity. No uniqueness theorem, self-citation chain, or definitional identification (e.g., an input defined in terms of the output) is used to force a result. The paper is self-contained as an empirical report, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper adds four hand-chosen training and architectural constants, relies on the accepted Mamba and ECAPA machinery, and depends critically on an undefined local-context vector and an assumed-causal backward path. No physical or mathematical entities are invented.

free parameters (4)

Circle loss margin m = 0.35
Chosen for training on the private set; applies to all baselines, but affects embedding margin and relative EER.
Circle loss scale s = 60
Chosen for training; no sensitivity analysis is provided.
Cyclical learning rate endpoints = 1e-8 to 1e-3 over 100k-step cycles
Chosen for training; not justified and may affect models unevenly.
MFA module output channels = 1536
MFA is referenced in Section 4.2 but never defined; the channel count is a fixed design choice with no ablation.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The Mamba selective state-space model from [9] behaves as described and can be inserted into ECAPA-TDNN without adverse interactions.
Invoked in Sections 2 and 3; the paper does not prove stability or architectural compatibility.
domain assumption The private studio dataset is a valid testbed for speaker verification and generalizes to real-world conditions.
Section 4.1 claims controlled quality and geographic filtering address VoxCeleb2 issues, but no external validation is given.
ad hoc to paper The local context vector c in Equations 3 and 4 is well-defined and can be computed causally for streaming.
c is never defined; the LCB-Mamba block rests entirely on it.
ad hoc to paper The backward path in LCB-Mamba, using Flip layers, preserves causality within each buffer.
Asserted in Section 3.1 but not formally shown; streaming validity depends on it.
domain assumption EER and minDCF differences on one evaluation set are meaningful without uncertainty estimates.
Section 4.3 reports single numbers with no confidence intervals, so superiority is assumed from point estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MASV: Speaker Verification with Global and Local Context Mamba." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6EXSS7VO

@misc{pith2026241210989,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MASV: Speaker Verification with Global and Local Context Mamba},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6EXSS7VO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10989}
}

read the original abstract

Deep learning models like Convolutional Neural Networks and transformers have shown impressive capabilities in speech verification, gaining considerable attention in the research community. However, CNN-based approaches struggle with modeling long-sequence audio effectively, resulting in suboptimal verification performance. On the other hand, transformer-based methods are often hindered by high computational demands, limiting their practicality. This paper presents the MASV model, a novel architecture that integrates the Mamba module into the ECAPA-TDNN framework. By introducing the Local Context Bidirectional Mamba and Tri-Mamba block, the model effectively captures both global and local context within audio sequences. Experimental results demonstrate that the MASV model substantially enhances verification performance, surpassing existing models in both accuracy and efficiency.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

MMW: Side Talk Rejection Multi-Microphone Whisper on Smart Glasses
eess.AS 2025-07 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

MMW combines a Mamba-based Mix Block, a Frame Diarization Mamba layer, and multi-scale GRPO to reduce side-talk interference in Whisper ASR, reporting WER as low as 3.71%.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

In such applications, the demand for both accurate and efficient verification is paramount

INTRODUCTION Speech verification is essential for validating the authenticity and reliability of speech inputs, particularly in edge devices like virtual reality (VR) systems and smart glasses, where high security and privacy are critical. In such applications, the demand for both accurate and efficient verification is paramount. Recent advances in deep l...

work page
[2]

1: MASV Pipeline and Architectures

BACKGROUND: MAMBA State Space Models (SSMs) are designed to map a 1-dimensional function or sequencex(t) 7→ y(t) ∈ R and can be represented through a linear Ordinary Differential Equation (ODE): arXiv:2412.10989v1 [eess.AS] 14 Dec 2024 (a) (b) (c) (d) Fig. 1: MASV Pipeline and Architectures. (a) Streaming application pipeline where each audio buffer is pr...

arXiv 2024
[3]

PROPOSED METHOD The proposed MASV model is built upon the ECAPA-TDNN framework, a state-of-the-art approach in speaker verification. Figure 1 presents the overall pipeline of the MASV model, highlighting components designed to address the limitations of traditional CNNs and Transformers in real-time applica- tions. Specifically, we replace the Res2 Dilate...

work page
[4]

Dataset We use a geographically filtered private development set as our dataset, consisting of 5,182,021 utterances from 28,622 speakers

EXPERIMENTS 4.1. Dataset We use a geographically filtered private development set as our dataset, consisting of 5,182,021 utterances from 28,622 speakers. This dataset was recorded in a soundproof studio to ensure controlled noise conditions and high-quality audio samples (48 kHz). Our approach addresses the limitations of V oxCeleb2, including noise cont...

work page 1989
[5]

All models are trained under these same conditions

We employ a batch size of 256 and the Circle loss function with m = 0.35 and s = 60to enforce stronger constraints on speaker embeddings. All models are trained under these same conditions. 4.3. Evaluation We report performance metrics in terms of Equal Error Rate (EER) and minimum Detection Cost Function (minDCF) with ptarget = 0.01, CFA = CMiss = 1. Tab...

work page
[6]

These innovations ad- dress the limitations of existing models by improving local and global context capture and ensuring robust information flow

CONCLUSION This paper introduces the MASV model, a novel speaker ver- ification architecture that enhances real-time accuracy and ef- ficiency by integrating the LCB-Mamba block, Tri-Mamba block, and full-scale skip connections. These innovations ad- dress the limitations of existing models by improving local and global context capture and ensuring robust...

work page
[7]

Ecapa-tdnn: Emphasized channel attention, propagation and aggregation in tdnn based speaker ver- ification,

Brecht Desplanques, Jenthe Thienpondt, and Kris De- muynck, “Ecapa-tdnn: Emphasized channel attention, propagation and aggregation in tdnn based speaker ver- ification,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.07143, 2020

arXiv 2005
[8]

Pcf: Ecapa-tdnn with progressive channel fu- sion for speaker verification,

Zhenduo Zhao, Zhuo Li, Wenchao Wang, and Pengyuan Zhang, “Pcf: Ecapa-tdnn with progressive channel fu- sion for speaker verification,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

work page 2023

Show all 21 references

[9]

Golden gemini is all you need: Finding the sweet spots for speaker verification,

Tianchi Liu, Kong Aik Lee, Qiongqiong Wang, and Haizhou Li, “Golden gemini is all you need: Finding the sweet spots for speaker verification,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Process- ing, 2024

2024
[10]

V ot: Revolution- izing speaker verification with memory and attention mechanisms,

Hongyu Wang, Hui Li, and Bo Li, “V ot: Revolution- izing speaker verification with memory and attention mechanisms,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16826, 2023

2023 arXiv
[11]

Real-time adaptive training for forensic speaker verification in reverberation condi- tions,

Khamis A Al-Karawi, “Real-time adaptive training for forensic speaker verification in reverberation condi- tions,” International Journal of Speech Technology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1079–1089, 2023

2023
[12]

Battling voice spoofing: a review, comparative analysis, and generalizability evaluation of state-of-the-art voice spoofing counter measures,

Awais Khan, Khalid Mahmood Malik, James Ryan, and Mikul Saravanan, “Battling voice spoofing: a review, comparative analysis, and generalizability evaluation of state-of-the-art voice spoofing counter measures,” Arti- ficial Intelligence Review, vol. 56, no. Suppl 1, pp. 513– 566, 2023

2023
[13]

Efficiently modeling long sequences with structured state spaces,

Albert Gu, Karan Goel, and Christopher R´e, “Efficiently modeling long sequences with structured state spaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.00396, 2021

2021 arXiv
[14]

Combin- ing recurrent, convolutional, and continuous-time mod- els with linear state space layers,

Albert Gu, Isys Johnson, Karan Goel, Khaled Saab, Tri Dao, Atri Rudra, and Christopher R ´e, “Combin- ing recurrent, convolutional, and continuous-time mod- els with linear state space layers,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 34, pp. 572–585, 2021

2021
[15]

Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces,

Albert Gu and Tri Dao, “Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00752, 2023

2023 arXiv
[16]

Moe-mamba: Efficient selective state space models with mixture of experts,

Maciej Pi ´oro, Kamil Ciebiera, Krystian Kr ´ol, Jan Ludziejewski, and Sebastian Jaszczur, “Moe-mamba: Efficient selective state space models with mixture of experts,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04081, 2024

2024 arXiv
[17]

Clinicalmamba: A generative clinical language model on longitudinal clinical notes,

Zhichao Yang, Avijit Mitra, Sunjae Kwon, and Hong Yu, “Clinicalmamba: A generative clinical language model on longitudinal clinical notes,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05795, 2024

2024 arXiv
[18]

Vi- sion mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model,

Lianghui Zhu, Bencheng Liao, Qian Zhang, Xin- long Wang, Wenyu Liu, and Xinggang Wang, “Vi- sion mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09417, 2024

2024 arXiv
[19]

Hippo: Recurrent memory with op- timal polynomial projections,

Albert Gu, Tri Dao, Stefano Ermon, Atri Rudra, and Christopher R ´e, “Hippo: Recurrent memory with op- timal polynomial projections,” Advances in neural in- formation processing systems, vol. 33, pp. 1474–1487, 2020

2020
[20]

Attention is all you need,

Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Ad- vances in neural information processing systems , vol. 30, 2017

2017
[21]

Long range arena: A benchmark for efficient transformers,

Yi Tay, Mostafa Dehghani, Samira Abnar, Yikang Shen, Dara Bahri, Philip Pham, Jinfeng Rao, Liu Yang, Se- bastian Ruder, and Donald Metzler, “Long range arena: A benchmark for efficient transformers,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.04006, 2020

2011 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

In such applications, the demand for both accurate and efficient verification is paramount

INTRODUCTION Speech verification is essential for validating the authenticity and reliability of speech inputs, particularly in edge devices like virtual reality (VR) systems and smart glasses, where high security and privacy are critical. In such applications, the demand for both accurate and efficient verification is paramount. Recent advances in deep l...

work page

[2] [2]

1: MASV Pipeline and Architectures

BACKGROUND: MAMBA State Space Models (SSMs) are designed to map a 1-dimensional function or sequencex(t) 7→ y(t) ∈ R and can be represented through a linear Ordinary Differential Equation (ODE): arXiv:2412.10989v1 [eess.AS] 14 Dec 2024 (a) (b) (c) (d) Fig. 1: MASV Pipeline and Architectures. (a) Streaming application pipeline where each audio buffer is pr...

arXiv 2024

[3] [3]

PROPOSED METHOD The proposed MASV model is built upon the ECAPA-TDNN framework, a state-of-the-art approach in speaker verification. Figure 1 presents the overall pipeline of the MASV model, highlighting components designed to address the limitations of traditional CNNs and Transformers in real-time applica- tions. Specifically, we replace the Res2 Dilate...

work page

[4] [4]

Dataset We use a geographically filtered private development set as our dataset, consisting of 5,182,021 utterances from 28,622 speakers

EXPERIMENTS 4.1. Dataset We use a geographically filtered private development set as our dataset, consisting of 5,182,021 utterances from 28,622 speakers. This dataset was recorded in a soundproof studio to ensure controlled noise conditions and high-quality audio samples (48 kHz). Our approach addresses the limitations of V oxCeleb2, including noise cont...

work page 1989

[5] [5]

All models are trained under these same conditions

We employ a batch size of 256 and the Circle loss function with m = 0.35 and s = 60to enforce stronger constraints on speaker embeddings. All models are trained under these same conditions. 4.3. Evaluation We report performance metrics in terms of Equal Error Rate (EER) and minimum Detection Cost Function (minDCF) with ptarget = 0.01, CFA = CMiss = 1. Tab...

work page

[6] [6]

These innovations ad- dress the limitations of existing models by improving local and global context capture and ensuring robust information flow

CONCLUSION This paper introduces the MASV model, a novel speaker ver- ification architecture that enhances real-time accuracy and ef- ficiency by integrating the LCB-Mamba block, Tri-Mamba block, and full-scale skip connections. These innovations ad- dress the limitations of existing models by improving local and global context capture and ensuring robust...

work page

[7] [7]

Ecapa-tdnn: Emphasized channel attention, propagation and aggregation in tdnn based speaker ver- ification,

Brecht Desplanques, Jenthe Thienpondt, and Kris De- muynck, “Ecapa-tdnn: Emphasized channel attention, propagation and aggregation in tdnn based speaker ver- ification,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.07143, 2020

arXiv 2005

[8] [8]

Pcf: Ecapa-tdnn with progressive channel fu- sion for speaker verification,

Zhenduo Zhao, Zhuo Li, Wenchao Wang, and Pengyuan Zhang, “Pcf: Ecapa-tdnn with progressive channel fu- sion for speaker verification,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

work page 2023