Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2008.03617

Speaker discrimination in humans and machines: Effects of speaking style variability

Amber Afshan·Jody Kreiman·Abeer Alwan
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Does speaking style variation affect humans' ability to distinguish individuals from their voices? How do humans compare with automatic systems designed to discriminate between voices? In this paper, we attempt to answer these questions by comparing human and machine speaker discrimination performance for read speech versus casual conversations. Thirty listeners were asked to perform a same versus different speaker task. Their performance was compared to a state-of-the-art x-vector/PLDA-based automatic speaker verification system. Results showed that both humans and machines performed better with style-matched stimuli, and human performance was better when listeners were native speakers of American English. Native listeners performed better than machines in the style-matched conditions (EERs of 6.96% versus 14.35% for read speech, and 15.12% versus 19.87%, for conversations), but for style-mismatched conditions, there was no significant difference between native listeners and machines. In all conditions, fusing human responses with machine results showed improvements compared to each alone, suggesting that humans and machines have different approaches to speaker discrimination tasks. Differences in the approaches were further confirmed by examining results for individual speakers which showed that the perception of distinct and confused speakers differed between human listeners and machines.

Explore related subjects

eess.AScs.LGeess.SP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Amber Afshan, Jody Kreiman, Abeer Alwan. 2020-08-08. Speaker discrimination in humans and machines: Effects of speaking style variability. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.03617

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Revisiting Lexicon Evaluation in Unsupervised Word Discovery

Building a lexicon from discovered word-like units is a central goal in zero-resource speech processing. But do our evaluations provide a trustworthy indication of lexicon quality? A common metric, normalized edit distance, averages the phoneme edit distances between discovered units in each cluster. We show that this metric has an inherent bias toward the quality of large clusters, inhibiting fair evaluation. Moreover, it ignores how well true classes are distributed across clusters. Based on established theory in clustering literature, we propose two metrics that address these shortcomings: a modified metric that weighs cluster size when assessing within-cluster consistency, and an inverse metric that assesses how true words are spread across clusters. Through experiments on synthetic and real-world lexicons, we demonstrate that combined, these metrics are: (1) more closely correlated with how similar a lexicon is to the ground-truth distribution, and (2) more robust to biases that skew lexicon evaluations.

eess.AS↗
arXiv2026

AURA: Uncertainty-Routed Activation Editing for Acoustic Grounding in Speech Foundation Models

Attention encoder-decoder (AED) Speech Foundation Models achieve strong ASR performance but can generate acoustically unsupported text when inputs contain no speech, weak acoustic evidence, or unreliable transcription. We propose AURA: Activation-editing with Uncertainty-Routed Adaptation, an ultra-efficient representation-editing method that freezes the pretrained model and applies sparse scale-and-shift edits to decoder cross-attention heads. AURA dynamically routes edits using cross-attention uncertainty features that capture over-concentration, diffuse attention, and abrupt frame shifts. We evaluate AURA on four datasets spanning non-speech hallucination and speech grounding stressors, including imperfect-label child speech, imperfect-label adult speech, and disfluent speech. On non-speech audio, AURA reduces hallucination rate from 89.18% to 1.94% without prior hallucination-head identification. On imperfect-label corpora, AURA approaches LoRA WER while using roughly 500x fewer trainable parameters. Sensitivity analysis and qualitative cross-attention examples are consistent with AURA's uncertainty-routed editing behavior, supporting dynamic activation editing as a practical path for grounding AED speech models.

eess.AS↗
arXiv2026

The design of an optomechanical microphone using a photonic waveguide interferometer

We present an optomechanical microphone based on a diaphragm-integrated photonic waveguide Mach-Zehnder interferometer. Acoustic pressure deforms the MEMS diaphragm, inducing strain in the sensing waveguide and changing its optical path length. We analytically evaluate the optical and mechanical transduction mechanisms and key figures of merit, including signal-to-noise ratio, dynamic range, acoustic overload pressure, and minimum detectable pressure. Two design cases are considered: a MEMS microphone and a measurement microphone. The results indicate competitive performance but no substantial overall advantage over state-of-the-art microphones in conventional applications. The architecture may nevertheless offer advantages for high-temperature and other harsh-environment sensing applications.

eess.AS↗