Editing
State-of-the-art
(section)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== N, K. D., Wang, P., & Bozza, B. (2021). Using Large Self-Supervised Models for Low-Resource Speech Recognition. ''Interspeech 2021'', 2436β2440. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2021-631</nowiki> ==== * Summary: This paper investigates the effectiveness of using large self-supervised pre-trained models (such as wav2vec 2.0) for low-resource speech recognition tasks. The authors conducted experiments on three Indian languages (Telugu, Tamil, and Gujarati), using different pre-trained models (monolingual English, multilingual) and compared different fine-tuning strategies (CTC, seq2seq, etc.). * RQ: For low-resource speech recognition tasks, how effective are large self-supervised pre-trained models (such as wav2vec 2.0) compared to traditional supervised learning methods? For Indian languages, are cross-lingual multilingual pre-trained models or monolingual English pre-trained models more suitable? How do different fine-tuning strategies (CTC vs seq2seq) affect model performance? Additionally, how well do these pre-trained models generalize to seen and unseen languages? * Hypothesis: *# Large self-supervised pre-trained models will outperform supervised learning models under low-resource conditions. *# Cross-lingual multilingual pre-trained models will perform better than monolingual English models on these Indian languages. *# Adopting the CTC fine-tuning strategy will achieve better performance than the seq2seq strategy. * Conclusion:The multilingual pre-trained model XLSR outperformed the monolingual models on all three languages; for seen languages (like Tamil), the pre-trained model can approach the best performance with only 50% of the training data; the CTC fine-tuning framework performed better than the seq2seq framework, possibly due to the small amount of data; even smaller English pre-trained models showed decent transfer performance on Indian languages. * Critical observations:The authors did not explain why the larger English pre-trained model underperformed compared to the smaller one, and analysis of the multilingual fine-tuning strategy was limited, only compared to the monolingual strategy. In addition, the impact of different pre-training corpora on model performance was not explored. * Relevance:This work is important for low-resource speech recognition domains in developing countries. Leveraging large self-supervised pre-trained models can make full use of unlabeled data, alleviating the bottleneck of limited labeled data. This study provides an effective solution for low-resource speech recognition tasks.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to MSc Voice Technology are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution (see
MSc Voice Technology:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
English
Views
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
More
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information