Because voices vary with mood, health, age, speaking style, and recording conditions, the voiceprint metaphor is scientifically misleading and voice evidence should be expressed as calibrated degrees of support.
Why Did the x-Vector System Miss a Target Speaker? Impact of Acoustic Mismatch Upon Target Score on VoxCeleb Data
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Modern automatic speaker verification (ASV) relies heavily on machine learning implemented through deep neural networks. It can be difficult to interpret the output of these black boxes. In line with interpretative machine learning, we model the dependency of ASV detection score upon acoustic mismatch of the enrollment and test utterances. We aim to identify mismatch factors that explain target speaker misses (false rejections). We use distance in the first- and second-order statistics of selected acoustic features as the predictors in a linear mixed effects model, while a standard Kaldi x-vector system forms our ASV black-box. Our results on the VoxCeleb data reveal the most prominent mismatch factor to be in F0 mean, followed by mismatches associated with formant frequencies. Our findings indicate that x-vector systems lack robustness to intra-speaker variations.
fields
eess.AS 1years
2026 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
The Voiceprint Fallacy: Why Voices Are Not Unique Biometric Imprints
Because voices vary with mood, health, age, speaking style, and recording conditions, the voiceprint metaphor is scientifically misleading and voice evidence should be expressed as calibrated degrees of support.