Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparative study of traditional and newly proposed features for recognition of speech under stress

Bou-Ghazale, S.E., Hansen, J.H.L.·2000·IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing

Abstract

It is well known that the performance of speech recognition algorithms degrade in the presence of adverse environments where a speaker is under stress, emotion, or Lombard (1911) effect. This study evaluates the effectiveness of traditional features in recognition of speech under stress and formulates new features which are shown to improve stressed speech recognition. The focus is on formulating robust features which are less dependent on the speaking conditions rather than applying compensation or adaptation techniques. The stressed speaking styles considered are simulated angry and loud. Lombard effect speech, and noisy actual stressed speech from the SUSAS database which is available on a CD-ROM through the NATO IST/TG-01 research group and LDC. In addition, this study investigates the immunity of the linear prediction power spectrum and fast Fourier transform power spectrum to the presence of stress. Our results show that unlike fast Fourier transform's (FFT) immunity to noise, the linear prediction power spectrum is more immune than FFT to stress as well as to a combination of a noisy and stressful environment. Finally, the effect of various parameter processing such as fixed versus variable preemphasis, liftering, and fixed versus cepstral mean normalization are studied. Two alternative frequency partitioning methods are proposed and compared with traditional mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC) features for stressed speech recognition. It is shown that the alternate filterbank frequency partitions are more effective for recognition of speech under both simulated and actual stressed conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/89.848224

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Bou-Ghazale, S. E., & Hansen, J. H. L.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing
Published
2000-07
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
429-442
ISSN
1063-6676 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2096503735
Cited by
264
References
3
FWCI
2.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparative study of traditional and newly proposed features for recognition of speech under stress. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/89.848224
The paper
Bou-Ghazale, S. E., & Hansen, J. H. L. (2000). A comparative study of traditional and newly proposed features for recognition of speech under stress. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/89.848224

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.