Exploring Filterbank Learning for Keyword Spotting
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite their great performance over the years, handcrafted speech features are not necessarily optimal for any particular speech application. Consequently, with greater or lesser success, optimal filterbank learning has been studied for different speech processing tasks. In this paper, we fill in a gap by exploring filterbank learning for keyword spotting (KWS). Two approaches are examined: filterbank matrix learning in the power spectral domain and parameter learning of a psychoacoustically-motivated gammachirp filterbank. Filterbank parameters are optimized jointly with a modern deep residual neural network-based KWS back-end. Our experimental results reveal that, in general, there are no statistically significant differences, in terms of KWS accuracy, between using a learned filterbank and handcrafted speech features. Thus, while we conclude that the latter are still a wise choice when using modern KWS back-ends, we also hypothesize that this could be a symptom of information redundancy, which opens up new research possibilities in the field of small-footprint KWS.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 30 May 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 1.
4 papers.
- 2021Deep Spoken Keyword Spotting: An Overviewcited by 43
- 2022EfficientLEAF: A Faster LEarnable Audio Frontend of Questionable Usecited by 8
- 2022Filterbank Learning for Noise-Robust Small-Footprint Keyword Spottingcited by 3
- 2023Instabilities in Convnets for Raw Audiocited by 2
- 2023Instabilities in Convnets for Raw Audio11 Sep 2023
- 2022Filterbank Learning for Noise-Robust Small-Footprint Keyword Spotting19 Nov 2022
- 2022EfficientLEAF: A Faster LEarnable Audio Frontend of Questionable Use12 Jul 2022
- 2021Deep Spoken Keyword Spotting: An Overview20 Nov 2021