REVIEW 1 cited by
An Initial Investigation for Detecting Partially Spoofed Audio
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
All existing databases of spoofed speech contain attack data that is spoofed in its entirety. In practice, it is entirely plausible that successful attacks can be mounted with utterances that are only partially spoofed. By definition, partially-spoofed utterances contain a mix of both spoofed and bona fide segments, which will likely degrade the performance of countermeasures trained with entirely spoofed utterances. This hypothesis raises the obvious question: 'Can we detect partially-spoofed audio?' This paper introduces a new database of partially-spoofed data, named PartialSpoof, to help address this question. This new database enables us to investigate and compare the performance of countermeasures on both utterance- and segmental- level labels. Experimental results using the utterance-level labels reveal that the reliability of countermeasures trained to detect fully-spoofed data is found to degrade substantially when tested with partially-spoofed data, whereas training on partially-spoofed data performs reliably in the case of both fully- and partially-spoofed utterances. Additional experiments using segmental-level labels show that spotting injected spoofed segments included in an utterance is a much more challenging task even if the latest countermeasure models are used.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
NE-PADD: Leveraging Named Entity Knowledge for Robust Partial Audio Deepfake Detection via Attention Aggregation
NE-PADD combines SpeechNER attention with a deepfake detector via fusion or transfer, reaching 7.89% EER on the new PartialSpoof-NER benchmark.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.