↓ Skip to main content

Improving Speaker Recognition by Biometric Voice Deconstruction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving Speaker Recognition by Biometric Voice Deconstruction
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luis Miguel Mazaira-Fernandez, Agustín Álvarez-Marquina, Pedro Gómez-Vilda

Abstract

Person identification, especially in critical environments, has always been a subject of great interest. However, it has gained a new dimension in a world threatened by a new kind of terrorism that uses social networks (e.g., YouTube) to broadcast its message. In this new scenario, classical identification methods (such as fingerprints or face recognition) have been forcedly replaced by alternative biometric characteristics such as voice, as sometimes this is the only feature available. The present study benefits from the advances achieved during last years in understanding and modeling voice production. The paper hypothesizes that a gender-dependent characterization of speakers combined with the use of a set of features derived from the components, resulting from the deconstruction of the voice into its glottal source and vocal tract estimates, will enhance recognition rates when compared to classical approaches. A general description about the main hypothesis and the methodology followed to extract the gender-dependent extended biometric parameters is given. Experimental validation is carried out both on a highly controlled acoustic condition database, and on a mobile phone network recorded under non-controlled acoustic conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Lecturer 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 42%
Computer Science 4 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Linguistics 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,306,690
of 24,268,934 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#2,151
of 7,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,826
of 279,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#22
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,268,934 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,716 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.