Cited by 58Emotion and Mood RecognitionSpeech Recognition and SynthesisMusic and Audio Processing

Learning Discriminative Features from Spectrograms Using Center Loss for Speech Emotion Recognition

Open access
Dai, Dongyang, Wu, Zhiyong, Li, Runnan, Wu, Xixin, Jia, Jia, Meng, Helen·2019·ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

Abstract

Identifying the emotional state from speech is essential for the natural interaction of the machine with the speaker. However, extracting effective features for emotion recognition is difficult, as emotions are ambiguous. We propose a novel approach to learn discriminative features from variable length spectrograms for emotion recognition by cooperating soft-max cross-entropy loss and center loss together. The soft-max cross-entropy loss enables features from different emotion categories separable, and center loss efficiently pulls the features belonging to the same emotion category to their center. By combining the two losses together, the discriminative power will be highly enhanced, which leads to network learning more effective features for emotion recognition. As demonstrated by the experimental results, after introducing center loss, both the unweighted accuracy and weighted accuracy are improved by over 3% on Mel-spectrogram input, and more than 4% on Short Time Fourier Transform spectrogram input.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icassp.2019.8683765

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The proposed model outperforms state-of-the-art unimodal SER models by at least 6.8% in mean weighted accuracy and 5.9% in mean unweighted accuracy (abstract: about 6% improvement).

    “It also outperforms state-of-the-art unimodal SER models [18, 19, 6] by at least 6.8% in mean weighted accuracy and 5.9% in mean unweighted accuracy.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 20 · Cited by 58

Authors
Dai, D., Wu, Z., Li, R., Wu, X., Jia, J., & Meng, H.
Affiliations
  • Tsinghua University (CN)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Venue
ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-05
Volume
2019
Pages
7405-7409
ISSN
1520-6149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2936372954
Cited by
58
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 2
FWCI
11.02
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • IEEE Conference Proceedings
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61375027, 61433018)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong
  • National Social Science Fund of China
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
Keywords
speech emotion recognition, center loss, discriminative feature learning, spectrogram, Mel spectrogram, short-time Fourier transform spectrograms

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