Cited by 57Speech Recognition and SynthesisBiometric Identification and SecuritySpeech and Audio Processing

SASV 2022: The First Spoofing-Aware Speaker Verification Challenge

Open access
Jung, Jee-weon, Tak, Hemlata, Shim, Hye-jin, Heo, Hee-Soo, Lee, Bong-Jin, Chung, Soo-Whan, Yu, Ha-Jin, Evans, Nicholas +1 more·2022·Interspeech 2022

Abstract

The first spoofing-aware speaker verification (SASV) challenge aims to integrate research efforts in speaker verification and anti-spoofing. We extend the speaker verification scenario by introducing spoofed trials to the usual set of target and impostor trials. In contrast to the established ASVspoof challenge where the focus is upon separate, independently optimised spoofing detection and speaker verification sub-systems, SASV targets the development of integrated and jointly optimised solutions. Pre-trained spoofing detection and speaker verification models are provided as open source and are used in two baseline SASV solutions. Both models and baselines are freely available to participants and can be used to develop back-end fusion approaches or end-to-end solutions. Using the provided common evaluation protocol, 23 teams submitted SASV solutions. When assessed with target, bona fide non-target and spoofed non-target trials, the top-performing system reduces the equal error rate of a conventional speaker verification system from 23.83% to 0.13%. SASV challenge results are a testament to the reliability of today's state-of-the-art approaches to spoofing detection and speaker verification.

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.2022-11270

Cites

34 of 35 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?

  • SASV challenge results have shown the need for larger labeled datasets for learning speaker embedding extractors and end-to-end solutions.

    “SASV challenge results [52] have shown the need for larger labeled datasets for the learning of speaker embedding extractors and end-to-end solutions.”

    From ASVspoof 2021: Towards Spoofed and Deepfake Speech Detection in the Wild (2023) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Discussion and Conclusions (Section 7; page not provided) say that future integrated, single-system approaches will likely depend on larger databases with more speakers and more diverse spoofing attacks. The paper does not specifically say that larger labeled datasets are needed to train speaker embedding extractors; Section 3 instead describes the existing database used to train ASV subsystems. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • SASV challenge results anticipate the significance of improving the reliability of both ASV and CM sub-systems, including joint optimization schemes.

    “A summary of SASV results [52] anticipates the significance of improving the reliability of both ASV and CM sub-systems, including the joint optimization schemes.”
  • Track 2 takes a step forward from EER-based metrics used in the first SASV challenge to DCF-based metrics.

    “Track 2 takes a step forward from EER-based metrics used in the first SASV challenge [6] to DCF-based metrics.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. A. Sizov, E. Khoury, T. Kinnunen et al., "Joint speaker verification and antispoofing in the i-vector space," IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 10, no. 4, 2015.
  2. X. Wang, J. Yamagishi et al., "ASVspoof 2019: a large-scale public database of synthetized, converted and replayed speech," Computer Speech & Language (CSL), vol. 64, 2020, 101114.
  3. D. Snyder, G. Chen and D. Povey, "Musan: A music, speech, and noise corpus," arXiv preprint:1510.08484, 2015. · arXiv
  4. J.-w. Jung, S.-b. Kim, H.-j. Shim et al., "Improved rawnet with filter-wise rescaling for text-independent speaker verification us- ing raw waveforms," in Proc. Interspeech, 2020, pp. 1496-1500.
  5. A. Alenin, R. Makarov, N. Torgashov et al., "The ID R&D System Description for Short-duration Speaker Verification Chal- lenge 2021," in Proc. Interspeech, 2021, pp. 2297-2301.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jung, J.-W., Tak, H., Shim, H.-J., Heo, H.-S., Lee, B.-J., Chung, S.-W., Yu, H.-J., Evans, N., & Kinnunen, T.
Affiliations
  • Naver (South Korea) (KR)
  • EURECOM (FR)
  • University of Seoul (KR)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
Venue
Interspeech 2022
Publisher
ISCA
Published
2022-09-18
Pages
2893-2897
ISSN
2308-457X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4297841768
Cited by
56
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 4
FWCI
6.22
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Interspeech (USB) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Biometric Identification and Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
Keywords
anti-spoofing, speaker verification, ASVspoof

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