PreprintCited by 49Music and Audio ProcessingSpeech and Audio ProcessingDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

A Closer Look at Weak Label Learning for Audio Events

Open access
Shah, Ankit, Kumar, Anurag, Hauptmann, Alexander G., Raj, Bhiksha·2018·arXiv

Abstract

Audio content analysis in terms of sound events is an important research problem for a variety of applications. Recently, the development of weak labeling approaches for audio or sound event detection (AED) and availability of large scale weakly labeled dataset have finally opened up the possibility of large scale AED. However, a deeper understanding of how weak labels affect the learning for sound events is still missing from literature. In this work, we first describe a CNN based approach for weakly supervised training of audio events. The approach follows some basic design principle desirable in a learning method relying on weakly labeled audio. We then describe important characteristics, which naturally arise in weakly supervised learning of sound events. We show how these aspects of weak labels affect the generalization of models. More specifically, we study how characteristics such as label density and corruption of labels affects weakly supervised training for audio events. We also study the feasibility of directly obtaining weak labeled data from the web without any manual label and compare it with a dataset which has been manually labeled. The analysis and understanding of these factors should be taken into picture in the development of future weak label learning methods. Audioset, a large scale weakly labeled dataset for sound events is used in our experiments.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1804.09288

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • Existing datasets for human vocal sounds have a relatively small number of vocal sound samples or noisy labels.

    “However, existing datasets have a relatively small number of vocal sound samples or noisy labels.”
  • The FSD50K evaluation set has more accurate labels while AudioSet labels are relatively noisy.

    “The reason why we use FSD50K rather than AudioSet as the base dataset is because FSD50K, especially its evaluation set, has more accurate labels [8] while labels of AudioSet are relatively noisy [6, 9, 10].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shah, A., Kumar, A., Hauptmann, A. G., & Raj, B.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W6960144812
Cited by
49
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
sound event detection, weakly supervised learning, audio classification

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