Cited by 8Speech Recognition and SynthesisBiometric Identification and SecuritySpeech and Audio Processing

Impact of Bandwidth and Channel Variation on Presentation Attack Detection for Speaker Verification

Delgado, Hector, Todisco, Massimiliano, Evans, Nicholas, Sahidullah, Md, Liu, Wei Ming, Alegre, Federico, Kinnunen, Tomi, Fauve, Benoit·2017·2017 International Conference of the Biometrics Special Interest Group (BIOSIG)

Abstract

Vulnerabilities to presentation attacks can undermine confidence in automatic speaker verification (ASV) technology. While efforts to develop countermeasures, known as presentation attack detection (PAD) systems, are now under way, the majority of past work has been performed with high-quality speech data. Many practical ASV applications are narrowband and encompass various coding and other channel effects. PAD performance is largely untested in such scenarios. This paper reports an assessment of the impact of bandwidth and channel variation on PAD performance. Assessments using two current PAD solutions and two standard databases show that they provoke significant degradations in performance. Encouragingly, relative performance improvements of 98% can nonetheless be achieved through feature optimisation. This performance gain is achieved by optimising the spectro-temporal decomposition in the feature extraction process to compensate for narrowband speech. However, compensating for channel variation is considerably more challenging.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.23919/biosig.2017.8053510

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Ideal clean conditions are unrealistic and other work has shown the likely degradation in countermeasure (CM) performance when deployed in practical scenarios such as person authentication over telephony channels.

    “Such ideal conditions are unrealistic and other work has shown the likely degradation in CM performance when they are deployed in practical scenarios such as person authentication over telephony channels [16], [17].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Delgado, H., Todisco, M., Evans, N., Sahidullah, M., Liu, W. M., Alegre, F., Kinnunen, T., & Fauve, B.
Affiliations
  • EURECOM (FR)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
Venue
2017 International Conference of the Biometrics Special Interest Group (BIOSIG)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2017-09
Volume
3
Pages
1-6
OpenAlex
W2756766252
Cited by
8
References
22
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.62
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Conference of the Biometrics Special Interest Group (BIOSIG) (publishedVersion)
  • Graduate School and Research Center in Digital Science (EURECOM) (submittedVersion)
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, narrowband speech, channel variation, bandwidth effects, feature extraction, speech coding

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