Vowel inherent spectral change in forensic voice comparison

Vowel Inherent Spectral Change

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 263-282

  Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LINGUISTICS; SPECTROSCOPY; TRAJECTORIES;

CONTROLLED CONDITIONS; DEGREE OF VALIDITY; EXTRACT INFORMATIONS; FORENSIC VOICE COMPARISONS; FORMANT TRAJECTORY; PHONEME IDENTIFICATION; SPEAKER VARIABILITY; TRAJECTORY APPROACH;

DIGITAL FORENSICS;

EID: 84872094946     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14209-3_11     Document Type: Chapter

References (72)

1. Aitken, C.G.G., Lucy, D.: Evaluation of trace evidence in the form of multivariate data. Appl. Stat 54, 109-122 (2004). doi:10.1111/j.1467-9876.2004.02031.x
2. Aitken, C.G.G., Roberts, P., Jackson, G.: Fundamentals of probability and statistical evidence in criminal. In: Proceedings guidance for judges, lawyers, forensic scientists and expert witnesses, Royal Statistical Society, London (2010)
3. Aitken, C.G.G., Taroni, F.: Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists. Wiley, Chichester (2004)
4. Balding, D.J.: Weight of evidence for forensic DNA profiles. Wiley, Chichester (2005)
5. Berger, C.E.H., Buckleton, J., Champod, C., Evett, I.W., Jackson, G.: Evidence evaluation: A response to the court of appeal judgment in R v T. Sci. Justice 51, 43-49 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.005
6. Brümmer, N., Burget, L., Cernocký, J.H., Glembek, O., Grézl, F., Karafiát, M., van Leeuwen, D.A., Matejka, P., Schwarz, P., Strasheim, A.: Fusion of heterogenous speaker recognition systems in the STBU submission for the NIST SRE 2006. IEEE. Trans. Audio. Speech. Lang. Process 15, 2072-2084 (2007). doi:10.1109/TASL.2007.902870
7. Brümmer, N., du Preez, J.: Application independent evaluation of speaker detection. Comput. Speech. Lang 20, 230-275 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.csl.2005.08.001
8. Buckleton, J.: A framework for interpreting evidence. In: Buckleton, J., Triggs, C.M., Walsh S.J. (eds.) Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, pp. 27-63 (2005)
9. Champod, C., Meuwly, D.: The inference of identity in forensic speaker recognition. Speech. Commun 31, 193-203 (2000). doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(99)00078-3
10. Enzinger, E.: Characterising formant tracks in Viennese diphthongs for forensic speaker comparison. In: Proceedings of the 39th Audio Engineering Society Conference-Audio Forensics: Practices and Challenges, Hillerød, Denmark. Audio Engineering Society, New York, pp. 47-52 (2010)
11. Eriksson, E.J., Cepeda, L.F., Rodman, R.D., McAllister, D.F., Bitzer, D., Arroway, P.: Crosslanguage speaker identification using spectral moments. In: Branderud, P., Traunmüller, H. (eds.) Proceedings of FONETIK 2004: The XVIIth Swedish Phonetics Conference. Stokholm, Sweden: Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University, pp. 76-79 (2004a)
12. Eriksson, E.J., Cepeda, L.F., Rodman, R.D., Sullivan, K.P.H., McAllister, D.F., Bitzer, D., Arroway, P.: Robustness of spectral moments: A study using voice imitations. In: Cassidy, S., Cox, F., Mannell, R., Palethorpe. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th Australian International Conference on Speech Sciences & Technology. Australian Speech Science & Technology Association, Canberra, pp. 259-264 (2004b)
13. Evett, I.W.: Towards a uniform framework for reporting opinions in forensic science case-work. Sci. Justice 38, 198-202 (1998). doi:10.1016/S1355-0306(98)72105-7
14. Evett, I.W.: Evaluation and professionalism. Sci. Justice 49, 159-160 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2009.07.001
15. Evett, I.W., Buckleton, J.S.: Statistical analysis of STR data. In: Carraredo, A., Brinkmann, B., Bär, W. (eds.) Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics, vol. 6, pp. 79-86. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)
16. Evett, I.W., and other signatories Expressing evaluative opinions: A position statement. science & justice. 51, 1-2 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.01.002
17. Foreman, L.A., Champod, C., Evett, I.W., Lambert, J.A., Pope, S.: Interpreting DNA evidence: A review. Int. Stat. J 71, 473-495 (2003). doi:10.1111/j.1751-5823.2003.tb00207.x
18. Goldstein, U.G.: Speaker-identifying features based on formant tracks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 59, 176-182 (1976). doi:10.1121/1.380837
19. González-Rodríguez, J., Drygajlo, A., Ramos-Castro, D., García-Gomar, M., Ortega-García, J.:Robust estimation, interpretation and assessment of likelihood ratios in forensic speaker recognition. Comput. Speech. Lang 20, 331-355 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.csl.2005.08.005
20. González-Rodríguez, J., Ramos, D.: Forensic automatic speaker classification in the coming paradigm shift. In: Müller, C. (eds) Speaker Classification I: Selected Projects. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 205-217 (2007)
21. González-Rodríguez, J., Rose, P., Ramos, D., Toledano, D.T., Ortega-García, J.: Emulating DNA: Rigorous quantification of evidential weight in transparent and testable forensic speaker recognition. IEEE. Trans. Audio. Speech. Lang. Process 15, 2104-2115 (2007). doi:10.1109/TASL.2007.902747
22. Gottfried, M., Miller, J.D., Meyer, D.J.: Three approaches to the classification of american english diphthongs. J. Phonetics 21, 205-229 (1993)
23. Greisbach, R., Esser, O., Weinstock, C.: Speaker identification by formant contours. In: Braun, A., Köster, J.-P. (eds.) Studies in Forensic Phonetics, pp. 49-55. Wissenschaftlicher, Trier, Germany (1995)
24. Guillemin, B.J., Watson, C.: Impact of the GSM mobile phone network on the speech signal:Some preliminary findings. Int. J. Speech, Lang. Law 15, 193-218 (2008). doi:10.1558/ijsll.v15i2.193
25. Harrington, J.: An acoustic analysis of happy-tensing in the Queen’s Christmas broadcasts. J. Phonetics 34, 439-457 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.001
26. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., Friedman, J.: The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (2009)
27. Hillenbrand, J.M., Clark, M.J., Nearey, T.M.: Effect of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109, 748-763 (2001). doi:10.1121/1.1337959
28. Ingram, J.C.L., Prandolini, R., Ong, S.: Formant trajectories as indices of speaker identification. Forensic. Linguist. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 3, 129-145 (1996)
29. Jessen, M.: Forensic phonetics language and linguistics. Compass 2, 671-711 (2008). doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2008.00066.x
30. Kasuya, H., Tan, X., Yang, C.-S.: Voice source and vocal tract characteristics associated with speaker individuality. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Spoken-Language Processing, Yokohama, pp. 1459-1462 (1994)
31. Kinoshita, Y., Osanai, T.: Within speaker variation in diphthongal dynamics: What can we compare?. In: Warren, P., Watson, C.I. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science&Technology, Auckland, New Zealand. Australia: Australasian Speech Science & Technology Association, Canberra, pp. 112-117 (2006)
32. Kuhn, T.S.: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1962)
33. Lehiste, I., Peterson, G.E.: Transitions, glides, and diphthongs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 33, 268-277 (1961). doi:10.1121/1.1908681
34. Lucy, D.: Introduction to Statistics for Forensic Scientists. Wiley, Chichester (2005)
35. McDougall, K.: Speaker-specific formant dynamics: an experiment on Australian English /aI/. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 11, 103-130 (2004)
36. McDougall, K.: Dynamic features of speech and the characterization of speakers. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 13, 89-126 (2006)
37. McDougall, K., Nolan F.: Discrimination of speakers using the formant dynamics of /u/in British English. In: Trouvain, J., Barry, W.J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th International Congress on Phonetic Sciences, Saarbrücken. Saarbrücken, Germany, pp. 1825-1828 (2007)
38. Meuwly, D.: Reconnaissance de locuteurs en sciences forensiques: l’apport d’une approche automatique. Dissertation, University of Lausanne, Switzerland (2001)
39. Morrison, G.S.: Forensic voice comparison using likelihood ratios based on polynomial curves fitted to the formant trajectories of Australian English /aI/. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 15, 247-264 (2008). doi:10.1558/ijsll.v15i2.249
40. Morrison, G.S.: Comments on Coulthard & Johnson’s (2007) portrayal of the likelihood-ratio framework. Aust. J. Forensic. Sci 41, 155-161 (2009a). doi:10.1080/00450610903147701
41. Morrison, G.S.: Forensic voice comparison and the paradigm shift. Sci. Justice 49, 298-308 (2009b). doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2009.09.002
42. Morrison, G.S.: Likelihood-ratio forensic voice comparison using parametric representations of the formant trajectories of diphthongs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 2387-2397 (2009c). doi:10.1121/1.3081384
43. Morrison, G.S.: Forensic voice comparison. In: Freckelton, I., Selby, H. (eds.) Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). Sydney, Australia: Thomson Reuters (2010)
44. Morrison, G.S.: A comparison of procedures for the calculation of forensic likelihood ratios from acoustic-phonetic data: Multvariate kernel density (MVKD) versus gaussian mixture model- universal background model (GMM-UBM). Speech. Commun 53, 242-256 (2011a). doi:10.1016/j.specom.2010.09.005
45. Morrison, G.S.: Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems. Sci. Justice 51, 91-98 (2011b). doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.002
46. Morrison, G.S.: Static and dynamic approaches to understanding vowel perception. In: Morrison, G.S., Assmann, P.F. (eds.) Theories of vowel inherent spectral change (ch. 3). Springer Verlag, Heidelberg (2013a)
47. Morrison, G.S.: The likelihood-ratio framework and forensic evidence in court: A response to R v T. Int. J. Evid. Proof 16, 1-29 (2012b). http://vathek.org/doi/abs/10.1350/ijep.2012.16.1.390
48. Morrison, G.S.: Tutorial on logistic regression calibration and fusion: Converting a score to a likelihood ratio. Aus. J. Forensic Sci. online 31 Oct 2012 (2012c). doi:10.1080/00450618.2012.733025
49. Morrison, G.S., Kinoshita, Y.: Automatic-type calibration of traditionally derived likelihood ratios: Forensic analysis of Australian English /o/formant trajectories. In: Proceedings of Interspeech Incorporating SST, International Speech Communication Association, pp. 1501-1504 (2008)
50. Morrison, G.S., Ochoa, F., Thiruvaran, T.: Database selection for forensic voice comparison. In:Proceedings of Odyssey 2012: The Language and Speaker Recognition Workshop, Singapore International Speech Communication Association, pp. 62-77 (2012)
51. Morrison, G.S., Thiruvaran, T., Epps, J.: Estimating the precision of the likelihood-ratio output of a forensic-voice-comparison system. In: Proceedings of Odyssey 2010: The Language and Speaker Recognition Workshop, Brno, Czech Republic. International Speech Communication Association (2010)
52. Nearey, T.M., Assmann, P.F.: Modeling the role of vowel inherent spectral change in vowel identification. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 80, 1297-1308 (1986). doi:10.1121/1.394433
53. Nolan, F.: Speaker recognition and forensic phonetics. In: Hardcastle, W.J., Laver, J. (eds.) The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, pp. 744-767. Blackwell, Oxford (1997)
54. Pigeon, S., Druyts, P., Verlinde, P.: Applying logistic regression to the fusion of the NIST’99 1- speaker submissions. Digital Signal Process 10, 237-248 (2000). doi:10.1006/dspr.1999.0358
55. Ramos Castro, D.: Forensic evaluation of the evidence using automatic speaker recognition systems. Dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain (2007)
56. Robertson, B., Vignaux, G.A.: Interpreting Evidence. Wiley, Chichester (1995)
57. Rodman, R., McAllister, D., Bitzer, D., Cepeda, L., Abbitt, P.: Forensic speaker identification based on spectral moments. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 9, 22-43 (2002)
58. Rose, P.: Forensic Speaker Identification. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)
59. Rose, P.: The technical comparison of forensic voice samples. In: Freckelton, I., Selby, H. (eds.) Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). Sydney, Australia: Thomson Lawbook (2003)
60. Rose, P.: Forensic speaker recognition at the beginning of the twenty-first century: An overview and a demonstration. Aust. J. Forensic. Sci 37, 49-72 (2005). doi:10.1080/00450610509410616
61. Rose, P.: Technical forensic speaker recognition: Evaluation, types and testing of evidence. Comput. Speech. Lang 20, 159-191 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.csl.2005.07.003
62. Rose, P., Kinoshita, Y., Alderman, T.: Realistic extrinsic forensic speaker discrimination with the diphthong /aI/. In: Warren, P., Watson, C.I. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science&Technology, Auckland, New Zealand. Canberra, Australia: Australasian Speech Science & Technology Association, pp. 329-334 (2006)
63. Rose, P., Morrison, G.S.: A response to the UK position statement on forensic speaker comparison. Int. J. Speech. Lang. Law 16, 139-163 (2009). doi:10.1558/ijsll.v16i1.139
64. Saks, M.J., Koehler, J.J.: The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science. Science 309, 892-895 (2005). doi:10.1126/science.1111565
65. Sambur, M.R.: Selection of acoustic features for speaker identification. IEEE. Trans. Acoust. Speech. Signal. Process 23, 176-182 (1975). doi:10.1109/TASSP.1975.1162664
66. Taitechawat, S., Foulkes, P.: Discrimination of speakers using tone and formant dynamics in Thai. In: Lee, W.-S., Zee, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China. Hong Kong: Organizers of ICPhS XVII at the Department of Chinese, Translation and Linguistics, City University of Hong Kong, pp. 1975-1981 (2011)
67. van Leeuwen, D.A., Brümmer, N.: An introduction to application-independent evaluation of speaker recognition systems. In: Müller, C. (eds) Speaker Classification I: Selected Projects, pp. 330-353. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2007)
68. Watson, C., Harrington, J.: Acoustic evidence of dynamic formant trajectories in Australian English vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 458-468 (1999). doi:10.1121/1.427069
69. Zahorian, S.A., Jagharghi, A.J.: Speaker normalization of static and dynamic vowel spectral features. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 90, 67-75 (1991). doi:10.1121/1.402350
70. Zahorian, S.A., Jagharghi, A.J.: Spectral-shape features versus formants as acoustic correlates for vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 94, 1966-1982 (1993). doi:10.1121/1.407520
71. Zhang, C., Morrison, G.S., Thiruvaran, T.: Forensic voice comparison using Chinese/iau/. In:Lee, W.-S., Zee, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China. Hong Kong: Organizers of ICPhS XVII at the Department of Chinese, Translation and Linguistics, City University of Hong Kong, pp. 2280-2283 (2011)
72. Zuo, D., Mok, P.P.K.: Formant dynamics of/ua/in the speech of Mandarin-Shanghainese bilingual identical twins. In: Lee, W.-S., Zee, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China. Hong Kong: Organizers of ICPhS XVII at the Department of Chinese, Translation and Linguistics, City University of Hong Kong, pp. 2332-2335 (2011)