Impact of Channel Variation on One-Class Learning for Spoof Detection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Margin-based losses, especially one-class classification loss, have improved the generalization capabilities of countermeasure systems (CMs), but their reliability is not tested with spoofing attacks degraded with channel variation. Our experiments aim to tackle this in two ways: first, by investigating the impact of various codec simulations and their corresponding parameters, namely bit-rate, discontinuous transmission (DTX), and loss, on the performance of the one-class classification-based CM system; second, by testing the efficacy of the various settings of margin-based losses for training and evaluating our CM system on codec simulated data. Multi-conditional training (MCT) along with various data-feeding and custom mini-batching strategies were also explored to handle the added variability in the new data setting and to find an optimal setting to carry out the above experiments. Our experimental results reveal that a strict restrain over the embedding space degrades the performance of the one-class classification model. MCT relatively improves performance by 35.55%, and custom mini-batching captures more generalized features for the new data setting. Whereas varying the codec parameters made a significant impact on the performance of the countermeasure system.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2021.
Builds on
13 of 25 references.
References · 13
- 2019ASVspoof 2019: Future Horizons in Spoofed and Fake Audio Detectioncited by 173
- 2021ASVspoof 2021: accelerating progress in spoofed and deepfake speech detectioncited by 157
- 2019Who is Real Bob? Adversarial Attacks on Speaker Recognition Systemscited by 66
- 2020One-class Learning Towards Synthetic Voice Spoofing Detectioncited by 59
- 2021A Comparative Study on Recent Neural Spoofing Countermeasures for Synthetic Speech Detectioncited by 56
- 2019STC Antispoofing Systems for the ASVspoof2019 Challengecited by 51
- 2021An Initial Investigation for Detecting Partially Spoofed Audiocited by 27
- 2020The Attacker's Perspective on Automatic Speaker Verification: An Overviewcited by 19
- 2021ASVspoof 2021: Automatic Speaker Verification Spoofing and Countermeasures Challenge Evaluation Plancited by 18
- 2021An Empirical Study on Channel Effects for Synthetic Voice Spoofing Countermeasure Systemscited by 9
- 2019Ensemble Models for Spoofing Detection in Automatic Speaker Verificationcited by 8
- 2016Spoofing Detection Goes Noisy: An Analysis of Synthetic Speech Detection in the Presence of Additive Noisecited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.