Towards Estimating the Upper Bound of Visual-Speech Recognition: The Visual Lip-Reading Feasibility Database
April 26, 2017 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Adriana Fernandez-Lopez, Oriol Martinez, Federico M. Sukno
arXiv ID
1704.08028
Category
cs.CV: Computer Vision
Citations
41
Venue
IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition
Last Checked
6 months ago
Abstract
Speech is the most used communication method between humans and it involves the perception of auditory and visual channels. Automatic speech recognition focuses on interpreting the audio signals, although the video can provide information that is complementary to the audio. Exploiting the visual information, however, has proven challenging. On one hand, researchers have reported that the mapping between phonemes and visemes (visual units) is one-to-many because there are phonemes which are visually similar and indistinguishable between them. On the other hand, it is known that some people are very good lip-readers (e.g: deaf people). We study the limit of visual only speech recognition in controlled conditions. With this goal, we designed a new database in which the speakers are aware of being read and aim to facilitate lip-reading. In the literature, there are discrepancies on whether hearing-impaired people are better lip-readers than normal-hearing people. Then, we analyze if there are differences between the lip-reading abilities of 9 hearing-impaired and 15 normal-hearing people. Finally, human abilities are compared with the performance of a visual automatic speech recognition system. In our tests, hearing-impaired participants outperformed the normal-hearing participants but without reaching statistical significance. Human observers were able to decode 44% of the spoken message. In contrast, the visual only automatic system achieved 20% of word recognition rate. However, if we repeat the comparison in terms of phonemes both obtained very similar recognition rates, just above 50%. This suggests that the gap between human lip-reading and automatic speech-reading might be more related to the use of context than to the ability to interpret mouth appearance.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Computer Vision
π
π
Old Age
π
π
Old Age
Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks
π
π
Old Age
SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detector
π
π
Old Age
Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks
π
π
Old Age
Fast R-CNN
π
π
Old Age
Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted