Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

This paper claims that a recognizer's own confidence scores can set the fusion weight for combining noisy and enhanced speech, yielding lower word error rates than existing observation-addition methods without any training.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 21:11 UTC pith:TZAL62BN

load-bearing objection A simple, training-free OA weight from ASR confidence that mostly works; the confidence proxy is the soft spot, and the paper's own oracle shows it in the high-gap cases. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.20967 v2 pith:TZAL62BN submitted 2026-02-24 eess.AS cs.AIcs.SD

Training-Free Intelligibility-Guided Observation Addition for Noisy ASR

Haoyang Li , Changsong Liu , Wei Rao , Hao Shi , Sakriani Sakti , Eng Siong Chng This is my paper
classification eess.AS cs.AIcs.SD
keywords observation additionspeech enhancement post-processingASR confidencenoise-robust automatic speech recognitiontraining-free fusionword error ratespeech intelligibility
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Observation addition combines a noisy recording with a speech-enhanced version to reduce recognition errors, and its quality hinges on how the two are weighted. This paper proposes setting the weight by asking the backend ASR itself how confident it is in each signal, then forming the fused audio as a confidence-weighted sum. The claimed result is that this training-free rule (Conf-OA) lowers word error rate across two enhancement models, three recognizers, and two datasets, and beats prior OA methods that rely on SNR estimates, quality scores, or separately trained classifiers. The paper also shows an oracle version using true word error rates performs best, which supports the design while indicating confidence is only an approximation.

Core claim

The central claim is that ASR confidence is a reliable, training-free substitute for true intelligibility in the observation-addition task. Using the fusion rule S' = conf(y) / (conf(y) + conf(x̂)), where y is the noisy signal, x̂ is the enhanced signal, and conf comes from the frozen backend ASR, the fused signal x̄ = S'·y + (1−S')·x̂ achieves the best practical WER across diverse SE-ASR combinations, outperforming SNR-based, DNSMOS-based, and trained-classifier OA baselines. The oracle WER-OA (Eq. 2), which uses true WERs, consistently reaches the lowest WER, confirming that intelligibility guidance is the right principle and that confidence is a workable proxy.

What carries the argument

The key mechanism is confidence-weighted observation addition: a closed-form interpolation x̄ = S'·y + (1−S')·x̂ whose scalar S' is the ratio of the backend ASR's confidence in the noisy signal to the sum of confidences in the noisy and enhanced signals. Confidence is computed per ASR family—token-weighted geometric mean of segment log-probabilities for Whisper, and Tsallis-entropy-based token confidence for Parakeet and Wav2Vec2-CTC—so the same framework adapts to different recognizers without retraining. This identity converts an ASR's internal uncertainty into a fusion weight that favors the signal the recognizer is more likely to transcribe correctly.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that ASR confidence for the noisy and enhanced signals is a faithful, same-scale estimate of each signal's expected recognition error—if the higher-WER signal receives higher confidence, the fusion weight points the wrong way.

What would settle it

Measure the Spearman correlation between the confidence difference conf(y) − conf(x̂) and the WER difference WER(x̂) − WER(y) over a large held-out noisy set; if the correlation is not positive, Eq. 3 systematically weights the worse signal. Concretely, if one constructs a set where the enhanced output is clearly better but the ASR is overconfident on the noisy input, Conf-OA should underperform simply choosing the enhanced signal, falsifying the claim that confidence is a reliable intelligibility proxy.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If Conf-OA holds up, speech enhancement front-ends can be post-processed without retraining or fine-tuning the SE or ASR models, making the method applicable to frozen, black-box systems.
  • ASR confidence can serve as a general proxy for intelligibility, meaning any ASR that emits confidence scores can drive observation addition without ground-truth transcriptions.
  • The method's wins over SNR- and DNSMOS-based OA suggest that targeting intelligibility (what the recognizer needs) rather than signal quality is the more effective fusion criterion.
  • Utterance-level fusion outperforms frame-level fusion, implying that preserving temporal continuity matters more than fine-grained adaptation in this setting.
  • The consistent superiority of oracle WER-OA indicates the headroom available to better calibrated confidence estimates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to generalize OA beyond two candidates—e.g., fusing one noisy signal with multiple enhanced versions—by normalizing confidence over all candidates, though the paper only tests the pairwise case.
  • Confidence calibration across ASR families is likely the main lever for closing the gap to oracle WER-OA; a lightweight calibration step (e.g., temperature scaling or Platt scaling on a small validation set) could improve Conf-OA without adding a full predictor.
  • Because the method depends on confidence being comparable for the same utterance's noisy and enhanced versions, it may be sensitive to systematic overconfidence in certain noise types; stress-testing on unseen noise distributions would reveal where the proxy breaks.
  • The frame-level negative result suggests that per-frame confidence estimates, while available, are not reliable enough to guide interpolation; sharper frame-level confidence (e.g., from a stronger CTC model) could be a testable path to fine-grained OA.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a training-free Observation Addition (OA) method for noise-robust ASR. Given a noisy signal y and an SE-enhanced version xhat, it computes an utterance-level fusion weight S' = conf(y)/(conf(y)+conf(xhat)) from the frozen backend ASR's confidence scores (Eq. 3), then interpolates y and xhat (Eq. 1). Confidence is obtained from Whisper decoding log-probabilities or from Tsallis-entropy-based token posteriors for Parakeet/Wav2Vec2. Experiments cover two SE models (Demucs, GR-KAN MP-SENet), three ASRs, and two datasets, comparing against SNR-, DNSMOS-, and classifier-based OA baselines, plus a confidence-based hard switch and frame-level OA. The paper reports that Conf-OA generally outperforms existing practical OA baselines, approaches an oracle WER-based bound (Eq. 2), and honestly identifies three Table-2 configurations where it fails to beat the noisy input.

Significance. The contribution is practically interesting: if the result holds, it removes the trained predictor stage of prior neural OA methods and uses information already available from the ASR, easing deployment. The evaluation is broad and the oracle WER-OA provides a useful sanity check. The paper is honest about failure cases. However, the core premise that raw confidence ratios are a reliable intelligibility proxy is not independently validated; the saturation analysis in the major comments suggests the premise fails in large-gap regimes. The lack of statistical support further limits the strength of the empirical claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (3), Table 2] Eq. (3) defines S'=conf(y)/(conf(y)+conf(xhat)). With typical confidence scores both in [0.5,1], S' lies in [1/3,2/3], so it cannot weight a much worse enhanced signal near zero. In Table 2, the three cases where Conf-OA fails to beat Noisy y (CHiME-4 Simu+Whisper, Simu+Parakeet, Real+Whisper with Demucs) have large gaps; e.g., Real+Whisper y=6.48, xhat=29.65, yet WER-OA reaches 5.97 with S'=0.82. Thus the Sec. 4.1 explanation ('relative performance gap') is incomplete: the mechanism is confidence-ratio saturation. Please report confidence distributions, test a transform (e.g., logit) that can approach 0/1, and rerun these cases.
  2. [Tables 1-4] Tables 1-4 give single WER values without error bars, seeds, or significance tests. Several key differences are tiny (Table 1 VoiceBank/Parakeet: Conf-OA 1.35 vs Classifier-OA2class 1.30; Table 2 VoiceBank/Parakeet: 2.11 vs 2.10). Without bootstrap confidence intervals or paired tests, 'best overall practical performance' (Sec. 4.1) may be noise. Please add statistical evaluation for Tables 1-2.
  3. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (5); Sec. 2.3] Sec. 2.1/2.3 introduce free parameters: Tsallis q=0.33, 'exponential normalization' temperature, CTC span pooling, epsilon. No values or sensitivity analysis are given. If these were tuned on the evaluation data, the 'training-free' claim is weakened; if fixed, state them. The asymmetry between Eq. (4) (token-weighted average for Whisper) and Eq. (5) (geometric mean for others) is also unexplained. This is needed for reproducibility.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Tables 1, 2] Formatting errors in cells, e.g., '5.3724.85', '1.267.64', '2.762.11' are missing spaces between numbers.
  2. [Abstract / throughout] 'V oiceBank' appears with an odd space; fix to 'VoiceBank'.
  3. [Sec. 2.2, Eq. (6)] The tie-breaking rule (choose y when confidences are equal) is arbitrary; since Table 3 shows a large ambiguous group, this choice could affect results and should be justified or tested.
  4. [Sec. 3.2.2] 'TDT' is used without definition; also, the confidence computation requires access to internal decoding statistics (token log-probs, CTC alignments), which may not be available from black-box ASR APIs. This practical limitation is not discussed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the fusion weight is computed from frozen ASR confidence at inference, WER is used only as an explicitly labeled idealized bound and as an independent evaluation metric.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain runs from the idealized WER-based weighting of Eq. (2) to the practical confidence-based weighting of Eq. (3), then to the OA combination of Eq. (1). WER-OA (Eq. 2) is explicitly presented as an idealized setting where WERs are available, and it is never claimed as the proposed deployable method; the deliverable is Conf-OA (Eq. 3), whose weights are computed at inference from the frozen backend ASR's posteriors via hand-specified transformations (Eqs. 4-5) involving no fitted constants and no use of ground-truth transcripts. The fused signal's WER is then measured as an independent evaluation of the same frozen ASR, so no reported result is fed back into the weight computation. The only self-citations are for SE model configurations and related SE work (e.g., [31]); they are not invoked to justify the OA weight formula or to forbid alternative formulations. Empirical concerns about confidence miscalibration and the compressed dynamic range of the ratio in Eq. (3) (Tables 2-3) are correctness/robustness issues, not circularity, because the paper's own analysis explicitly acknowledges miscalibration and shows the OA structure can still help. Thus no load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method intentionally introduces no trainable parameters: the central claim adds essentially no fitted constants. Remaining hand-chosen design elements (Tsallis q, normalization temperature, pooling) can shift the confidence scale and therefore the Eq. 3 weights across ASR families, and the confidence scale itself is reused between weighting and decoding, which is the main self-referential coupling in the pipeline.

free parameters (4)
  • Tsallis entropy exponent q = 0.33
    Hand-chosen in Sec. 2.1 to compute token confidence for Parakeet/Wav2Vec2; no ablation or justification, and it sets the scale of conf() entering Eq. 3.
  • Exponential-normalization temperature = unspecified (implied 1)
    Secs. 2.1 and 2.3 apply an 'exponentially normalized transformation' to Tsallis entropy; the temperature/scaling is not specified and affects the relative magnitudes of conf(y) and conf(x̂).
  • CTC span aggregation = min pooling
    Sec. 2.1: frame-level confidences are aggregated into token confidence via min pooling over greedy CTC spans; a design choice not ablated.
  • epsilon = 1e-8
    Added in Eqs. 2-3 to avoid division by zero; numerically inconsequential.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption ASR confidence is a practical approximation of speech intelligibility (expected WER).
    Invoked in Sec. 2.1 to replace WER in Eq. 2 with conf() in Eq. 3; if false, the weights are misdirected. Table 3 quantifies miscalibration but never independently validates the proxy.
  • domain assumption y and x̂ are time-aligned with equal duration so Eq. 1 interpolation is well-defined.
    Sec. 2.3 asserts frame indices of y and x̂ align due to fixed convolutional strides; true for the tested SE models because they preserve length, but it is a precondition for both utterance- and frame-level OA.
  • domain assumption Utterance-level scalar interpolation is at least as good as frame-level for the backend ASR.
    Motivated by temporal-consistency reasoning in Sec. 4.3 and supported only by Wav2Vec2 results in Table 4; a data-dependent assumption, not a general principle.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 151 in / 17007 out tokens · 177302 ms · 2026-08-02T21:11:15.507642+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Automatic speech recognition (ASR) degrades severely in noisy environments. Although speech enhancement (SE) front-ends effectively suppress background noise, they often introduce artifacts that harm recognition. Observation addition (OA) addressed this issue by fusing noisy and SE enhanced speech, improving recognition without modifying the parameters of the SE or ASR models. This paper proposes an intelligibility-guided OA method, where fusion weights are derived from intelligibility estimates obtained directly from the backend ASR. Unlike prior OA methods based on trained neural predictors, the proposed method is training-free, reducing complexity and enhances generalization. Extensive experiments across diverse SE-ASR combinations and datasets demonstrate strong robustness and improvements over existing OA baselines. Additional analyses of intelligibility-guided switching-based alternatives and frame versus utterance-level OA further validate the proposed design.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.20967 by Changsong Liu, Eng Siong Chng, Hao Shi, Haoyang Li, Sakriani Sakti, Wei Rao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The proposed Confidence-guided OA pipeline. CER and WER measured by an ASR system serve as direct indicators of speech intelligibility. In an idealized setting where the WERs of both the noisy speech y and the enhanced speech xˆ are available, an intelligibility-based weighting factor can be constructed by normalizing their inverse error rates: S ′ = 1/WER(y) 1/WER(y) + 1/WER(ˆx) . (2) This formulation ass… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Where Speech Enhancement Hurts Recognition: An Inference Time Polar Projection Diagnosis

    eess.AS 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Magnitude strength, not estimated phase, drives SE-induced ASR degradation, and the optimal strength is recognizer-dependent (strong for wav2vec 2.0, mild for Whisper).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 9 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The performance of ASR degrades significantly in the presence of background noise [1–3]

    Introduction Automatic speech recognition (ASR) aims to transform spo- ken audio signals into their corresponding textual transcriptions. The performance of ASR degrades significantly in the presence of background noise [1–3]. Speech enhancement (SE), which suppresses background noise to estimate cleaner speech [4–7], is widely adopted as a front-end prep...

  2. [2]

    Intelligibility-Guided Observation Addition We aim to design a robust OA coefficientS ′ to combine the noisy speechyand enhanced speechˆx, guided by two de- sign considerations

    Methodology 2.1. Intelligibility-Guided Observation Addition We aim to design a robust OA coefficientS ′ to combine the noisy speechyand enhanced speechˆx, guided by two de- sign considerations. (1)S ′ should depend on bothyandˆxto adaptively balance their complementary information, and (2)S′ should be driven by speech intelligibility rather than signal-l...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  3. [3]

    Datasets We evaluate the proposed OA method under both in-domain and out-of-domain conditions using two datasets, with all au- dio sampled at 16 kHz

    Experiments 3.1. Datasets We evaluate the proposed OA method under both in-domain and out-of-domain conditions using two datasets, with all au- dio sampled at 16 kHz. For in-domain experiments, SE models are trained on the training split of V oiceBank-DEMAND [29], and OA is evaluated on the corresponding test set. V oiceBank- DEMAND is a widely adopted SE...

  4. [4]

    Comparison with previous OA methods Tables 1 and 2 compare various OA methods

    Results and discussion 4.1. Comparison with previous OA methods Tables 1 and 2 compare various OA methods. WER-OA (Eq. 2) consistently achieves the lowest WER in all test cases, support- ing the design of intelligibility-guided OA in Section 2.1. The proposed Conf-OA (Eq. 3) achieves the best overall practical performance, confirming ASR confidence as a r...

  5. [5]

    Conclusion This work proposes an intelligibility-guided SE post-processing framework for noise-robust ASR. By performing OA with fu- sion weights derived from backend ASR confidence scores, the proposed method effectively balances noisy and enhanced speech, leading to recognition improvements across multiple SE-ASR systems and datasets, and outperforming ...

  6. [6]

    Speech enhancement using continuous embeddings of neural audio codec,

    H. Li, J. Q. Yip, T. Fan, and E. S. Chng, “Speech enhancement using continuous embeddings of neural audio codec,” inICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–5

    2025

  7. [7]

    Virtanen, R

    T. Virtanen, R. Singh, and B. Raj,Techniques for noise robustness in automatic speech recognition. John Wiley & Sons, 2012

    2012

  8. [8]

    An overview of noise-robust automatic speech recognition,

    J. Li, L. Deng, Y . Gong, and R. Haeb-Umbach, “An overview of noise-robust automatic speech recognition,”IEEE/ACM Transac- tions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 745–777, 2014

    2014

  9. [9]

    Analyzing the performance of asr systems: The effects of noise, distance to the device, age and gender,

    A. Rodrigues, R. Santos, J. Abreu, P. Bec ¸a, P. Almeida, and S. Fer- nandes, “Analyzing the performance of asr systems: The effects of noise, distance to the device, age and gender,” inProceedings of the XX International Conference on Human Computer Interac- tion, 2019, pp. 1–8

    2019

  10. [10]

    Real time speech enhancement in the waveform domain,

    A. Defossez, G. Synnaeve, and Y . Adi, “Real time speech enhancement in the waveform domain,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.12847, 2020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  11. [11]

    Mp-senet: A speech enhance- ment model with parallel denoising of magnitude and phase spec- tra,

    Y .-X. Lu, Y . Ai, and Z.-H. Ling, “Mp-senet: A speech enhance- ment model with parallel denoising of magnitude and phase spec- tra,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.13686, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Interactive feature fu- sion for end-to-end noise-robust speech recognition,

    Y . Hu, N. Hou, C. Chen, and E. S. Chng, “Interactive feature fu- sion for end-to-end noise-robust speech recognition,” inICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 6292–6296

    2022

  13. [13]

    Aligning generative speech enhancement with human preferences via direct preference optimization,

    H. Li, N. Hou, Y . Hu, J. Yao, S. M. Siniscalchi, and E. S. Chng, “Aligning generative speech enhancement with human preferences via direct preference optimization,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.09929, 2025

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Strate- gies for distant speech recognitionin reverberant environments,

    M. Delcroix, T. Yoshioka, A. Ogawa, Y . Kubo, M. Fujimoto, N. Ito, K. Kinoshita, M. Espi, S. Araki, T. Horiet al., “Strate- gies for distant speech recognitionin reverberant environments,” EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, vol. 2015, no. 1, p. 60, 2015

    2015

  15. [15]

    Deep xi as a front-end for robust automatic speech recognition,

    A. Nicolson and K. K. Paliwal, “Deep xi as a front-end for robust automatic speech recognition,” in2020 IEEE Asia-Pacific Confer- ence on Computer Science and Data Engineering (CSDE). IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  16. [16]

    Towards decoupling frontend enhancement and backend recognition in monaural robust asr,

    Y . Yang, A. Pandey, and D. Wang, “Towards decoupling frontend enhancement and backend recognition in monaural robust asr,” Computer Speech & Language, vol. 95, p. 101821, 2026

    2026

  17. [17]

    How bad are artifacts?: Analyzing the impact of speech enhancement errors on asr,

    K. Iwamoto, T. Ochiai, M. Delcroix, R. Ikeshita, H. Sato, S. Araki, and S. Katagiri, “How bad are artifacts?: Analyzing the impact of speech enhancement errors on asr,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.06685, 2022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    How does end-to-end speech recog- nition training impact speech enhancement artifacts?

    K. Iwamoto, T. Ochiai, M. Delcroix, R. Ikeshita, H. Sato, S. Araki, and S. Katagiri, “How does end-to-end speech recog- nition training impact speech enhancement artifacts?” inICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2024, pp. 11 031– 11 035

    2024

  19. [19]

    A joint training framework for ro- bust automatic speech recognition,

    Z.-Q. Wang and D. Wang, “A joint training framework for ro- bust automatic speech recognition,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 796– 806, 2016

    2016

  20. [20]

    Investigation into joint op- timization of single channel speech enhancement and acoustic modeling for robust asr,

    T. Menne, R. Schl ¨uter, and H. Ney, “Investigation into joint op- timization of single channel speech enhancement and acoustic modeling for robust asr,” inICASSP 2019-2019 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2019, pp. 6660–6664

    2019

  21. [21]

    Snri target training for joint speech enhancement and recognition,

    Y . Koizumi, S. Karita, A. Narayanan, S. Panchapagesan, and M. Bacchiani, “Snri target training for joint speech enhancement and recognition,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.00764, 2021

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Multitask-based joint learning approach to robust asr for radio communication speech,

    D. Ma, N. Hou, H. Xu, E. S. Chnget al., “Multitask-based joint learning approach to robust asr for radio communication speech,” in2021 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Associa- tion Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC). IEEE, 2021, pp. 497–502

    2021

  23. [23]

    Build- ing state-of-the-art distant speech recognition using the chime-4 challenge with a setup of speech enhancement baseline,

    S.-J. Chen, A. S. Subramanian, H. Xu, and S. Watanabe, “Build- ing state-of-the-art distant speech recognition using the chime-4 challenge with a setup of speech enhancement baseline,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.10109, 2018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [24]

    Overlap-adaptive hybrid speaker diarization and asr-aware observation addition for misp 2025 challenge,

    S. Huang, Y . Du, J. Yang, D. Zhang, X. Jia, J. Deng, J. Kang, and R. Zheng, “Overlap-adaptive hybrid speaker diarization and asr-aware observation addition for misp 2025 challenge,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.22013, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    For Whis- per, we use the Whisper-large model, while for Parakeet we adopt the parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2 model1

    and Parakeet [26, 27] are employed as strong, noise-robust ASR models, representing large-scale sequence-to-sequence and TDT-based transducer frameworks, respectively. For Whis- per, we use the Whisper-large model, while for Parakeet we adopt the parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2 model1. In addition, we include a wav2vec2-large ASR model [28] fine-tuned on the full Li...

  26. [26]

    Noise robust speech emotion recognition with signal-to-noise ratio adapting speech en- hancement,

    Y .-W. Chen, J. Hirschberg, and Y . Tsao, “Noise robust speech emotion recognition with signal-to-noise ratio adapting speech en- hancement,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.01164, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    Bridging the gap: Integrating pre-trained speech enhancement and recognition models for ro- bust speech recognition,

    K.-C. Wang, Y .-J. Li, W.-L. Chen, Y .-W. Chen, Y .-C. Wang, P.- C. Yeh, C. Zhang, and Y . Tsao, “Bridging the gap: Integrating pre-trained speech enhancement and recognition models for ro- bust speech recognition,” in2024 32nd European Signal Process- ing Conference (EUSIPCO). IEEE, 2024, pp. 426–430

    2024

  28. [28]

    Reducing the gap between pretrained speech en- hancement and recognition models using a real speech-trained bridging module,

    Z. Cui, C. Cui, T. Wang, M. He, H. Shi, M. Ge, C. Gong, L. Wang, and J. Dang, “Reducing the gap between pretrained speech en- hancement and recognition models using a real speech-trained bridging module,” inICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Con- ference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–5

    2025

  29. [29]

    Dnsmos: A non-intrusive perceptual objective speech quality metric to evaluate noise sup- pressors,

    C. K. Reddy, V . Gopal, and R. Cutler, “Dnsmos: A non-intrusive perceptual objective speech quality metric to evaluate noise sup- pressors,” inICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2021, pp. 6493–6497

    2021

  30. [30]

    Learning to enhance or not: Neural network- based switching of enhanced and observed signals for overlap- ping speech recognition,

    H. Sato, T. Ochiai, M. Delcroix, K. Kinoshita, N. Kamo, and T. Moriya, “Learning to enhance or not: Neural network- based switching of enhanced and observed signals for overlap- ping speech recognition,” inICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 6287–6291

    2022

  31. [31]

    Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,

    A. Radford, J. W. Kim, T. Xu, G. Brockman, C. McLeavey, and I. Sutskever, “Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,” inInternational conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2023, pp. 28 492–28 518

    2023

  32. [32]

    Fast conformer with linearly scalable attention for efficient speech recognition,

    D. Rekesh, N. R. Koluguri, S. Kriman, S. Majumdar, V . Noroozi, H. Huang, O. Hrinchuk, K. Puvvada, A. Kumar, J. Balamet al., “Fast conformer with linearly scalable attention for efficient speech recognition,” in2023 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–8

    2023

  33. [33]

    Efficient sequence transduction by jointly predicting tokens and durations,

    H. Xu, F. Jia, S. Majumdar, H. Huang, S. Watanabe, and B. Gins- burg, “Efficient sequence transduction by jointly predicting tokens and durations,” inInternational Conference on Machine Learn- ing. PMLR, 2023, pp. 38 462–38 484

    2023

  34. [34]

    wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech repre- sentations,

    A. Baevski, Y . Zhou, A. Mohamed, and M. Auli, “wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech repre- sentations,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 33, pp. 12 449–12 460, 2020

    2020

  35. [35]

    Investigating rnn-based speech enhancement methods for noise- robust text-to-speech

    C. Valentini-Botinhao, X. Wang, S. Takaki, and J. Yamagishi, “Investigating rnn-based speech enhancement methods for noise- robust text-to-speech.” inSSW, 2016, pp. 146–152

    2016

  36. [36]

    The 4th chime speech separation and recognition challenge,

    E. Vincent, S. Watanabe, J. Barker, and R. Marxer, “The 4th chime speech separation and recognition challenge,”URL: http://spandh. dcs. shef. ac. uk/chime challenge/(last accessed on 1 August, 2018), 2016

    2018

  37. [37]

    From kan to gr-kan: Advancing speech enhancement with kan- based methodology,

    H. Li, Y . Hu, C. Chen, S. M. Siniscalchi, S. Liu, and E. S. Chng, “From kan to gr-kan: Advancing speech enhancement with kan- based methodology,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.17778, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Lib- rispeech: an asr corpus based on public domain audio books,

    V . Panayotov, G. Chen, D. Povey, and S. Khudanpur, “Lib- rispeech: an asr corpus based on public domain audio books,” in2015 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2015, pp. 5206–5210

    2015