Cited by 1Speech Recognition and SynthesisSpeech and Audio ProcessingDigital Media Forensic Detection

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Machine Learning Approaches for Speech Forensics

Open access
Yadav, Amit Kumar Singh·2024·Purdue University Graduate School

Abstract

Several incidents report misuse of synthetic speech for impersonation attacks, spreading misinformation, and supporting financial frauds. To counter such misuse, this dissertation focuses on developing methods for speech forensics. First, we present a method to detect compressed synthetic speech. The method uses comparatively 33 times less information from compressed bit stream than used by existing methods and achieve high performance. Second, we present a transformer neural network method that uses 2D spectral representation of speech signals to detect synthetic speech. The method shows high performance on detecting both compressed and uncompressed synthetic speech. Third, we present a method using an interpretable machine learning approach known as disentangled representation learning for synthetic speech detection. Fourth, we present a method for synthetic speech attribution. It identifies the source of a speech signal. If the speech is spoken by a human, we classify it as authentic/bona fide. If the speech signal is synthetic, we identify the generation method used to create it. We examine both closed-set and open-set attribution scenarios. In a closed-set scenario, we evaluate our approach only on the speech generation methods present in the training set. In an open-set scenario, we also evaluate on methods which are not present in the training set. Fifth, we propose a multi-domain method for synthetic speech localization. It processes multi-domain features obtained from a transformer using a ResNet-style MLP. We show that with relatively less number of parameters, the proposed method performs better than existing methods. Finally, we present a new direction of research in speech forensics i.e., bias and fairness of synthetic speech detectors. By bias, we refer to an action in which a detector unfairly targets a specific demographic group of individuals and falsely labels their bona fide speech as synthetic. We show that existing synthetic speech detectors are gender, age and accent biased. They also have bias against bona fide speech from people with speech impairments such as stuttering. We propose a set of augmentations that simulate stuttering in speech. We show that synthetic speech detectors trained with proposed augmentation have less bias relative to detector trained without it.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.25394/pgs.27365298

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1

Metadata

Authors
Yadav, A. K. S.
Affiliations
Purdue University System (US)
Corresponding author
Yadav, Amit Kumar Singh
Venue
Purdue University Graduate School
Publisher
Purdue University Graduate School
Published
2024-10-31
OpenAlex
W6926448153
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1
Type
dissertation
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Purdue (cc-by)
Funders
United States Department of the Air Force (FA87502021004)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
Keywords
speech forensics, synthetic speech detection, transformer models, disentangled representation learning, bias and fairness, gender bias, speech disorders, impersonation attacks, misinformation

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