Cited by 211Speech Recognition and SynthesisSpeech and Audio ProcessingEmotion and Mood Recognition

The INTERSPEECH 2012 speaker trait challenge

Open access
Schuller, Björn, Steidl, Stefan, Batliner, Anton, Nöth, Elmar, Vinciarelli, Alessandro, Burkhardt, Felix, Son, Rob van, Weninger, Felix +4 more·2012·Interspeech 2012

Abstract

The INTERSPEECH 2012 Speaker Trait Challenge provides for the first time a unified test-bed for 'perceived' speaker traits: Personality in the five OCEAN personality dimensions, likability of speakers, and intelligibility of pathologic speakers.In this paper, we describe these three Sub-Challenges, Challenge conditions, baselines, and a new feature set by the openSMILE toolkit, provided to the participants.

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 · 10.21437/interspeech.2012-86

Cites

13 of 13 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?

  • The number of features per utterance varies from several hundred to several thousand, depending on the employed LLDs and HSFs.

    “This number varies from several hundred [157] to several thousand [158], [123], depending on the employed LLDs and HSFs.”
  • The number of features per utterance varies from several hundred to several thousand, depending on the employed LLDs and HSFs.

    “This number varies from several hundred [157] to several thousand [158], [123], depending on the employed LLDs and HSFs.”

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
Schuller, B., Steidl, S., Batliner, A., Nöth, E., Vinciarelli, A., Burkhardt, F., Son, R. V., Weninger, F., Eyben, F., Bocklet, T., Mohammadi, G., & Weiss, B.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • MorphoSys (Germany) (DE)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • Deutsche Telekom (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
Venue
Interspeech 2012
Publisher
ISCA
Published
2012-09-09
Pages
254-257
ISSN
2308-457X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1501506202
Cited by
211
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 18
FWCI
23.30
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Interspeech (USB) (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • OPUS (Augsburg University) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
European Commission (289021)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition

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