Spanish and English Phoneme Recognition by Training on Simulated Classroom Audio Recordings of Collaborative Learning Environments

Audio recordings of collaborative learning environments contain a constant presence of cross-talk and background noise. Dynamic speech recognition between Spanish and English is required in these environments. To eliminate the standard requirement of large-scale ground truth, the thesis develops a simulated dataset by transforming audio transcriptions into phonemes and using 3D speaker geometry and data augmentation to generate an acoustic simulation of Spanish and English speech. The thesis develops a low-complexity neural network for recognizing Spanish and English phonemes (available at github.com/muelitas/keywordRec). When trained on 41 English phonemes, 0.099 PER is achieved on Speech Commands. When trained on 36 Spanish phonemes and tested on real recordings of collaborative learning environments, a 0.7208 LER is achieved. Slightly better than Google's Speech-to-text 0.7272 LER, which used anywhere from 15 to 1,635 times more parameters and trained on 300 to 27,500 hours of real data as opposed to 13 hours of simulated audios.

Bilingual Speech Recognition by Estimating Speaker Geometry from Video Data

Speech recognition is very challenging in student learning environments that are characterized by significant cross-talk and background noise. To address this problem, we present a bilingual speech recognition system that uses an interactive video analysis system to estimate the 3D speaker geometry for realistic audio simulations. We demonstrate the use of our system in generating a complex audio dataset that contains significant cross-talk and background noise that approximate real-life classroom recordings. We then test our proposed system with real-life recordings. In terms of the distance of the speakers from the microphone, our interactive video analysis system obtained a better average error rate of 10.83% compared to 33.12% for a baseline approach. Our proposed system gave an accuracy of 27.92% that is 1.5% better than Google Speech-to-text on the same dataset. In terms of 9 important keywords, our approach gave an average sensitivity of 38% compared to 24% for Google Speech-to-text, while both methods maintained high average specificity of 90% and 92%. On average, sensitivity improved from 24% to 38% for our proposed approach. On the other hand, specificity remained high for both methods (90% to 92%).