Using conditional random fields to predict pitch accents in conversational speech

Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 677-683

  Gregory, Michelle L ^a   Altun, Yasemin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^b Brown Univerity   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; CONTINUOUS SPEECH RECOGNITION; FORECASTING; RANDOM PROCESSES;

AUTOMATIC DETECTION; CONVERSATIONAL SPEECH; PITCH ACCENTS; PROBABILISTICS; PROSODICS; RANDOM FIELDS; SEQUENCE LABELING; SEQUENCE MODELS; SWITCHBOARD CORPUS; WORD LEVEL;

SPEECH SYNTHESIS;

EID: 85149102760     PISSN: 0736587X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Y. Altun, T. Hofmann, and M. Johnson. 2003a. Discriminative learning for label sequences via boosting. In Proc. of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
2. Y. Altun, I. Tsochantaridis, and T. Hofmann. 2003b. Hidden markov support vector machines. In Proc. of 20th International Conference on Machine Learning.
3. M. Collins. 2002. Discriminative training methods for Hidden Markov Models: Theory and experiments with perceptron algorithms. In Proc. of Empirical Methods of Natural Language Processing.
4. A. Conkie, G. Riccardi, and R. Rose. 1999. Prosody recognition from speech utterances using acoustic and linguistic based models of prosodic events. In Proc. of EUROSPEECH’99.
5. W. J. Conover. 1980. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. Wiley, New York, 2nd edition.
6. E. Fosler-Lussier and N. Morgan. 1999. Effects of speaking rate and word frequency on conversational pronunci ations. In Speech Communication.
7. J. Godfrey, E. Holliman, and J. McDaniel. 1992. SWITCHBOARD: Telephone speech corpus for research and develo pment. In Proc. of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.
8. S. Greenberg, D. Ellis, and J. Hollenback. 1996. Insights into spoken language gleaned from phonetic transcripti on of the Switchboard corpus. In Proc. of International Conference on Spoken Language Processsing.
9. J. Hirschberg. 1993. Pitch accent in context: Predicting intonational prominence from text. Artificial Intelligence, 63(1-2):305–340.
10. M. Johnson, S. Geman, S. Canon, Z. Chi, and S. Riezler. 1999. Estimators for stochastic unification-based grammars. In Proc. of ACL’99 Association for Computational Linguistics.
11. J. Lafferty, A. McCallum, and F. Pereira. 2001. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In Proc. of 18th International Conference on Machine Learning.
12. A. McCallum, D. Freitag, and F. Pereira. 2000. Maximum Entropy Markov Models for Information Extraction and Segmentation. In Proc. of 17th International Conference on Machine Learning.
13. A. McCallum. 2003. Efficiently inducing features of Conditional Random Fields. In Proc. of Uncertainty in Articifical Intelligence.
14. T. Minka. 2001. Algorithms for maximum-likelihood logistic regression. Technical report, CMU, Department of Statistics, TR 758.
15. S. Pan and J. Hirschberg. 2001. Modeling local context for pitch accent prediction. In Proc. of ACL’01, Association for Computational Linguistics.
16. S. Pan and K. McKeown. 1999. Word informativeness and automatic pitch accent modeling. In Proc. of the Joint SIGDAT Conference on EMNLP and VLC.
17. V. Punyakanok and D. Roth. 2000. The use of classifiers in sequential inference. In Proc. of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
18. F. Sha and F. Pereira. 2003. Shallow parsing with conditional random fields. In Proc. of Human Language Technology.
19. Xuejing Sun. 2002. Pitch accent prediction using ensemble machine learning. In Proc. of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing.
20. B. Taskar, C. Guestrin, and D. Koller. 2004. Max-margin markov networks. In Proc. of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
21. P. Taylor. 2000. Analysis and synthesis of intonation using the Tilt model. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.
22. C. W. Wightman, A. K. Syrdal, G. Stemmer, A. Conkie, and M. Beutnagel. 2000. Perceptually Based Automatic Prosody Labeling and Prosodically Enriched Unit Selection Improve Concatenative Text-To-Speech Synthesis. volume 2, pages 71–74.