4.6 Article

Tri-integrated convolutional neural network for audio image classification using Mel-frequency spectrograms

期刊

MULTIMEDIA TOOLS AND APPLICATIONS
卷 82, 期 4, 页码 5521-5546

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11042-022-13358-1

关键词

Transfer learning; VGG16; VGG19; TiCNN; Data augmentation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes an integrated methodology called TiCNN for emotion classification based on Mel-frequency spectrograms. By training and validating on multiple datasets, the proposed method achieves high accuracy and performance.
Emotion is a state which encompasses a variety of physiological phenomena. Classification of emotions has many applications in fields like customer review, product evaluation, national security, etc., thus making it a prominent area of research. The state-of-art methodologies have used either text or audio files to classify emotions which is in contrast to the proposed work which utilizes the Mel-frequency spectrograms. An integrated methodology TiCNN (Tri integrated Convolutional Neural Network) has been proposed for classifying emotions into eight different classes. Three models namely VGG16, VGG19, and a proposed CNN architecture have been integrated and trained on the RAVDESS (Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song) dataset. The proposed integrated TiCNN approach classifies emotions into eight different classes with an accuracy of 93.27%. Precision, recall and F1-Score of 0.93, 0.92 and 0.92 have also been used as metrics to evaluate the performance of the proposed model. Further, for model validation, the efficiency and efficacy of the proposed methodology have been compared and analysed with the EMO-DB (Berlin Database of Emotional Speech) dataset. The proposed TiCNN model gives an accuracy of 92.78% on the EMO-DB dataset. Empirical evaluation of the proposed methodology has been compared with conventional transfer learning models and state-of-the-art methodologies, where it has shown its superiority over others.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据