4.6 Article

Multi-Scale Recurrence Quantification Measurements for Voice Disorder Detection

Journal

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
Volume 12, Issue 18, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app12189196

Keywords

voice disorder; recurrence quantification analysis; speech signal

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61271359]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a method of multiscale recurrence quantification measures (MRQMs) for voice disorder detection, achieving a high accuracy and potential for multi-classification of voice disorders.
Due to the complexity and non-stationarity of the voice generation system, the nonlinearity of speech signals cannot be accurately quantified. Recently, the recurrence quantification analysis method has been used for voice disorder detection. In this paper, multiscale recurrence quantification measures (MRQMs) are proposed. The signals are reconstructed in the high-dimensional phase space at the equivalent rectangular bandwidth scale. Recurrence plots (RPs) combining the characteristics of human auditory perception are drawn with an appropriate recurrence threshold. Based on the above, the nonlinear dynamic recurrence features of the speech signal are quantized from the recurrence plot of each frequency channel. Furthermore, this paper explores the recurrence quantification thresholds that are most suitable for pathological voices. Our results show that the proposed MRQMs with support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), Bayesian network (BN) and Local Weighted Learning (LWL) achieve an average accuracy of 99.45%, outperforming traditional features and other complex measurements. In addition, MRQMs also have the potential for multi-classification of voice disorder, achieving an accuracy of 89.05%. This study demonstrates that MRQMs can characterize the recurrence characteristic of pathological voices and effectively detect voice disorders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available