Pith. sign in

REVIEW

On Crowdsourcing-design with Comparison Category Rating for Evaluating Speech Enhancement Algorithms

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

arxiv 2306.01538 v1 pith:3KIB452F submitted 2023-06-02 eess.AS

On Crowdsourcing-design with Comparison Category Rating for Evaluating Speech Enhancement Algorithms

classification eess.AS
keywords qualityspeechalgorithmsaudiocomparisonenhancementevaluationcategory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Speech enhancement techniques improve the quality or the intelligibility of an audio signal by removing unwanted noise. It is used as preprocessing in numerous applications such as speech recognition, hearing aids, broadcasting and telephony. The evaluation of such algorithms often relies on reference-based objective metrics that are shown to correlate poorly with human perception. In order to evaluate audio quality as perceived by human observers it is thus fundamental to resort to subjective quality assessment. In this paper, a user evaluation based on crowdsourcing (subjective) and the Comparison Category Rating (CCR) method is compared against the DNSMOS, ViSQOL and 3QUEST (objective) metrics. The overall quality scores of three speech enhancement algorithms from real time communications (RTC) are used in the comparison using the P.808 toolkit. Results indicate that while the CCR scale allows participants to identify differences between processed and unprocessed audio samples, two groups of preferences emerge: some users rate positively by focusing on noise suppression processing, while others rate negatively by focusing mainly on speech quality. We further present results on the parameters, size considerations and speaker variations that are critical and should be considered when designing the CCR-based crowdsourcing evaluation.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.