4.5 Article

Phoneme-group specific octave-band weights in predicting speech intelligibility

期刊

SPEECH COMMUNICATION
卷 38, 期 3-4, 页码 399-411

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00011-0

关键词

speech intelligibility; octave-band contributions; frequency-importance function; phoneme groups; diagnostic prediction; objective measurement; speech transmission index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In an earlier study we derived robust frequency-weighting functions for prediction of the intelligibility of short nonsense words. These frequency-weighting functions are applied for prediction of intelligibility such as with the speech transmission index (STI). Six independent experiments revealed essentially similar frequency-weighting functions for the prediction of the nonsense word scores with respect to signal-to-noise ratio and gender [Speech Communication 28 (1999) 109]. Although the frequency weightings do not vary significantly for signal-to-noise ratio or gender, other studies have shown that using different types of speech material (i.e., nonsense words, phonetically balanced words and connected discourse) resulted in quite different frequency-weighting functions. This may be related to the distribution of specific phonemes in the test material. In order to obtain a more generic description of the frequency weighting, four relevant groups of phonemes were identified. In situations with reduced intelligibility, a small confusion rate of the phonemes between the groups and a high confusion rate of the phonemes within each group was observed. For each group a specific frequency-weighting function and a good prediction of the phoneme group scores could be obtained. It was shown that from these (weighted) phoneme group scores, word scores could be predicted with a prediction accuracy of ca. 4% (this corresponds to a signal-to-noise ratio of about I dB). Hence, this method provides a more generic way to predict intelligibility scores for different types of speech material. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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