Killing two birds with one stone: Can an audio captioning system also be used for audio-text retrieval?

Automated Audio Captioning (AAC) aims to develop systems capable of describing an audio recording using a textual sentence. In contrast, Audio-Text Retrieval (ATR) systems seek to find the best matching audio recording(s) for a given textual query (Text-to-Audio) or vice versa (Audio-to-Text). These tasks require different types of systems: AAC employs a sequence-to-sequence model, while ATR utilizes a ranking model that compares audio and text representations within a shared projection subspace. However, this work investigates the relationship between AAC and ATR by exploring the ATR capabilities of an unmodified AAC system, without fine-tuning for the new task. Our AAC system consists of an audio encoder (ConvNeXt-Tiny) trained on AudioSet for audio tagging, and a transformer decoder responsible for generating sentences. For AAC, it achieves a high SPIDEr-FL score of 0.298 on Clotho and 0.472 on AudioCaps on average. For ATR, we propose using the standard Cross-Entropy loss values obtained for any audio/caption pair. Experimental results on the Clotho and AudioCaps datasets demonstrate decent recall values using this simple approach. For instance, we obtained a Text-to-Audio R@1 value of 0.382 for Au-dioCaps, which is above the current state-of-the-art method without external data. Interestingly, we observe that normalizing the loss values was necessary for Audio-to-Text retrieval.

Adapting a ConvNeXt model to audio classification on AudioSet

In computer vision, convolutional neural networks (CNN) such as ConvNeXt, have been able to surpass state-of-the-art transformers, partly thanks to depthwise separable convolutions (DSC). DSC, as an approximation of the regular convolution, has made CNNs more efficient in time and memory complexity without deteriorating their accuracy, and sometimes even improving it. In this paper, we first implement DSC into the Pretrained Audio Neural Networks (PANN) family for audio classification on AudioSet, to show its benefits in terms of accuracy/model size trade-off. Second, we adapt the now famous ConvNeXt model to the same task. It rapidly overfits, so we report on techniques that improve the learning process. Our best ConvNeXt model reached 0.471 mean-average precision on AudioSet, which is better than or equivalent to recent large audio transformers, while using three times less parameters. We also achieved positive results in audio captioning and audio retrieval with this model. Our PyTorch source code and checkpoint models are available at https://github.com/topel/audioset-convnext-inf.

Multitask learning in Audio Captioning: a sentence embedding regression loss acts as a regularizer

In this work, we propose to study the performance of a model trained with a sentence embedding regression loss component for the Automated Audio Captioning task. This task aims to build systems that can describe audio content with a single sentence written in natural language. Most systems are trained with the standard Cross-Entropy loss, which does not take into account the semantic closeness of the sentence. We found that adding a sentence embedding loss term reduces overfitting, but also increased SPIDEr from 0.397 to 0.418 in our first setting on the AudioCaps corpus. When we increased the weight decay value, we found our model to be much closer to the current state-of-the-art methods, with a SPIDEr score up to 0.444 compared to a 0.475 score. Moreover, this model uses eight times less trainable parameters. In this training setting, the sentence embedding loss has no more impact on the model performance.

Is my automatic audio captioning system so bad? spider-max: a metric to consider several caption candidates

Automatic Audio Captioning (AAC) is the task that aims to describe an audio signal using natural language. AAC systems take as input an audio signal and output a free-form text sentence, called a caption. Evaluating such systems is not trivial, since there are many ways to express the same idea. For this reason, several complementary metrics, such as BLEU, CIDEr, SPICE and SPIDEr, are used to compare a single automatic caption to one or several captions of reference, produced by a human annotator. Nevertheless, an automatic system can produce several caption candidates, either using some randomness in the sentence generation process, or by considering the various competing hypothesized captions during decoding with beam-search, for instance. If we consider an end-user of an AAC system, presenting several captions instead of a single one seems relevant to provide some diversity, similarly to information retrieval systems. In this work, we explore the possibility to consider several predicted captions in the evaluation process instead of one. For this purpose, we propose SPIDEr-max, a metric that takes the maximum SPIDEr value among the scores of several caption candidates. To advocate for our metric, we report experiments on Clotho v2.1 and AudioCaps, with a transformed-based system. On AudioCaps for example, this system reached a SPIDEr-max value (with 5 candidates) close to the SPIDEr human score of reference.

Improving Deep-learning-based Semi-supervised Audio Tagging with Mixup

Recently, semi-supervised learning (SSL) methods, in the framework of deep learning (DL), have been shown to provide state-of-the-art results on image datasets by exploiting unlabeled data. Most of the time tested on object recognition tasks in images, these algorithms are rarely compared when applied to audio tasks. In this article, we adapted four recent SSL methods to the task of audio tagging. The first two methods, namely Deep Co-Training (DCT) and Mean Teacher (MT) involve two collaborative neural networks. The two other algorithms, called MixMatch (MM) and FixMatch (FM), are single-model methods that rely primarily on data augmentation strategies. Using the Wide ResNet 28-2 architecture in all our experiments, 10% of labeled data and the remaining 90\% as unlabeled, we first compare the four methods' accuracy on three standard benchmark audio event datasets: Environmental Sound Classification (ESC-10), UrbanSound8K (UBS8K), and Google Speech Commands (GSC). MM and FM outperformed MT and DCT significantly, MM being the best method in most experiments. On UBS8K and GSC, in particular, MM achieved 18.02% and 3.25% error rates (ER), outperforming models trained with 100% of the available labeled data, which reached 23.29% and 4.94% ER, respectively. Second, we explored the benefits of using the mixup augmentation in the four algorithms. In almost all cases, mixup brought significant gains. For instance, on GSC, FM reached 4.44% and 3.31% ER without and with mixup.