The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of four approaches to automatic language identification of telephone speech
Abstract
We have compared the performance of four approaches for automatic language identification of speech utterances: Gaussian mixture model (GMM) classification; single-language phone recognition followed by language-dependent, interpolated n-gram language modeling (PRLM); parallel PRLM, which uses multiple single-language phone recognizers, each trained in a different language; and language-dependent parallel phone recognition (PPR). These approaches, which span a wide range of training requirements and levels of recognition complexity, were evaluated with the Oregon Graduate Institute Multi-Language Telephone Speech Corpus. Systems containing phone recognizers performed better than the simpler GMM classifier. The top-performing system was parallel PRLM, which exhibited an error rate of 2 % for 45-s utterances and 5 % for 10-s utterances in two-language, closed-set, forced choice classification. The error rate for 11-language, closed-set, forced-choice classification was 11 % for 45-s utterances and 21 % for 10-s utterances.
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
Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x · Cited by 50,444
An Algorithm for Vector Quantizer Design
Linde, Y., Buzo, A., & Gray, R. (1980) · IEEE Transactions on Communications · doi:10.1109/tcom.1980.1094577 · Cited by 7,201
Davis, S., & Mermelstein, P. (1980) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1980.1163420 · Cited by 5,465
SWITCHBOARD: telephone speech corpus for research and development
Godfrey, J. J., Holliman, E. C., & McDaniel, J. (1992) · [Proceedings] ICASSP-92: 1992 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp.1992.225858 · Cited by 2,134
Cited by
An overview of text-independent speaker recognition: From features to supervectors
Kinnunen, T., & Li, H. (2010) · Speech Communication · doi:10.1016/j.specom.2009.08.009 · Cited by 1,434
Zaidan, O. F., & Callison-Burch, C. (2014) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00169 · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Zissman, M. A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing
- Published
- 1996-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31
- ISSN
- 1063-6676 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2172287020
- Cited by
- 618
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.17
- 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: Comparison of four approaches to automatic language identification of telephone speech. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tsa.1996.481450
- The paper
- Zissman, M. A. (1996). Comparison of four approaches to automatic language identification of telephone speech. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tsa.1996.481450
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.
