Cited by 26Music and Audio ProcessingSpeech Recognition and SynthesisMachine Learning and Data Classification

Addressing Missing Labels in Large-Scale Sound Event Recognition Using a Teacher-Student Framework With Loss Masking

Open access
Fonseca, Eduardo, Hershey, Shawn, Plakal, Manoj, Ellis, Daniel P. W., Jansen, Aren, Moore, R. Channing·2020·IEEE Signal Processing Letters

Abstract

The study of label noise in sound event recognition has recently gained attention with the advent of larger and noisier datasets. This work addresses the problem of missing labels, one of the big weaknesses of large audio datasets, and one of the most conspicuous issues for AudioSet. We propose a simple and model-agnostic method based on a teacher-student framework with loss masking to first identify the most critical missing label candidates, and then ignore their contribution during the learning process. We find that a simple optimisation of the training label set improves recognition performance without additional computation. We discover that most of the improvement comes from ignoring a critical tiny portion of the missing labels. We also show that the damage done by missing labels is larger as the training set gets smaller, yet it can still be observed even when training with massive amounts of audio. We believe these insights can generalize to other large-scale datasets.

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/lsp.2020.3006378

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Existing datasets for human vocal sounds have a relatively small number of vocal sound samples or noisy labels.

    “However, existing datasets have a relatively small number of vocal sound samples or noisy labels.”

    From Vocalsound: A Dataset for Improving Human Vocal Sounds Recognition (2022) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Introduction (page not provided) contrasts small sound-event datasets with larger datasets that have label-noise problems, supporting the general trade-off. It does not establish that datasets specifically for human vocal sounds have few vocal samples or noisy labels. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The FSD50K evaluation set has more accurate labels while AudioSet labels are relatively noisy.

    “The reason why we use FSD50K rather than AudioSet as the base dataset is because FSD50K, especially its evaluation set, has more accurate labels [8] while labels of AudioSet are relatively noisy [6, 9, 10].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fonseca, E., Hershey, S., Plakal, M., Ellis, D. P. W., Jansen, A., & Moore, R. C.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
Venue
IEEE Signal Processing Letters
Published
2020
Volume
27
Pages
1235-1239
ISSN
  • 1070-9908 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2361
OpenAlex
W3021910945
Cited by
26
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Signal Processing Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Google Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
Keywords
missing labels, sound event recognition, label noise, teacher-student models, AudioSet, training data size

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