The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Considerations in dynamic time warping algorithms for discrete word recognition
Abstract
The technique of dynamic time warping for time registration of a reference and test utterance has found widespread use in the areas of speaker verification and discrete word recognition. As originally proposed, the algorithm placed strong constraints on the possible set of dynamic paths-namely it was assumed that the initial and final frames of both the test and reference utterances were in exact time synchrony. Because of inherent practical difficulties with satisfying the assumptions under which the above constraints are valid, we have considered some modifications to the dynamic time warping algorithm. In particular, an algorithm in which an uncertainty exists in the registration both for initial and final frames was studied. Another modification constrains the dynamic path to follow (within a given range) the path which is locally optimum at each frame. This modification tends to work well when the location of the final frame of the test utterance is significantly in error due to breath noise, etc. To test the different time warping algorithms a set of ten isolated words spoken by 100 speakers was used. Probability density functions of the distances from each of the 100 versions of a word to a reference version of the word were estimated for each of three dynamic warping algorithms. From these data, it is shown that, based on a set of assumptions about the distributions of the distances, the warping algorithm that minimizes the overall probability of making a word error is the modified time warping algorithm with unconstrained endpoints. A discussion of this key result along with some ideas on where the other modifications would be most useful is included.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Dynamic Programming Algorithm Optimization for Spoken Word Recognition
Sakoe, H., & Chiba, S. (1978) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1978.1163055 · Cited by 6,727
Cited by
Davis, S., & Mermelstein, P. (1980) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1980.1163420 · Cited by 5,465
Computing and Visualizing Dynamic Time Warping Alignments in R: The dtw Package
Giorgino, T. (2009) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v031.i07 · Cited by 1,254
Three Myths about Dynamic Time Warping Data Mining
Ratanamahatana, C. A., & Keogh, E. (2005) · Proceedings of the 2005 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining · doi:10.1137/1.9781611972757.50 · Cited by 393
DAVIS, S. B., & MERMELSTEIN, P. (1990) · Readings in Speech Recognition · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-051584-7.50010-3 · Cited by 341
Parenting Stress Undermines Mother-Child Brain-to-Brain Synchrony: A Hyperscanning Study
Azhari, A., Leck, W. Q., Gabrieli, G., Bizzego, A., Rigo, P., Setoh, P., Bornstein, M. H., & Esposito, G. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-47810-4 · Cited by 175
Metadata
- Authors
- Rabiner, L., Rosenberg, A., & Levinson, S.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing
- Published
- 1978-12
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 575-582
- ISSN
- 0096-3518 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2072054026
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.35
- 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: Considerations in dynamic time warping algorithms for discrete word recognition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tassp.1978.1163164
- The paper
- Rabiner, L., Rosenberg, A., & Levinson, S. (1978). Considerations in dynamic time warping algorithms for discrete word recognition. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tassp.1978.1163164
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.