More Like this

1. Real-time Speaker counting in a cocktail party scenario using Attention-guided Convolutional Neural Network

   Yousefi, M. ; Hansen, J.H.L. ( September 2021 , ISCA INTERSPEECH-2021)

   Most current speech technology systems are designed to operate well even in the presence of multiple active speakers. However, most solutions assume that the number of co-current speakers is known. Unfortunately, this information might not always be available in real-world applications. In this study, we propose a real-time, single-channel attention-guided Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to estimate the number of active speakers in overlapping speech. The proposed system extracts higher-level information from the speech spectral content using a CNN model. Next, the attention mechanism summarizes the extracted information into a compact feature vector without losing critical information. Finally, the active speakers are classified using a fully connected network. Experiments on simulated overlapping speech using WSJ corpus show that the attention solution is shown to improve the performance by almost 3% absolute over conventional temporal average pooling. The proposed Attention-guided CNN achieves 76.15% for both Weighted Accuracy and average Recall, and 75.80% Precision on speech segments as short as 20 frames (i.e., 200 ms). All the classification metrics exceed 92% for the attention-guided model in offline scenarios where the input signal is more than 100 frames long (i.e., 1s).
2. A Deep Learning-Based Real-time Seizure Detection System

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB50085.2020.9353623  

   Shawki, N. ; Elseify, T. ; Cap, T. ; Shah, V. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2020 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)

   Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEGmore »channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9.« less
3. Zero-Shot Personalized Speech Enhancement Through Speaker-Informed Model Selection

   https://doi.org/10.1109/WASPAA52581.2021.9632752  

   Sivaraman, Aswin ; Kim, Minje ( October 2021 , 2021 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (WASPAA))

   This paper presents a novel zero-shot learning approach towards personalized speech enhancement through the use of a sparsely active ensemble model. Optimizing speech denoising systems towards a particular test-time speaker can improve performance and reduce run-time complexity. However, test-time model adaptation may be challenging if collecting data from the test-time speaker is not possible. To this end, we propose using an ensemble model wherein each specialist module denoises noisy utterances from a distinct partition of training set speakers. The gating module inexpensively estimates test-time speaker characteristics in the form of an embedding vector and selects the most appropriate specialist module for denoising the test signal. Grouping the training set speakers into non-overlapping semantically similar groups is non-trivial and ill-defined. To do this, we first train a Siamese network using noisy speech pairs to maximize or minimize the similarity of its output vectors depending on whether the utterances derive from the same speaker or not. Next, we perform k-means clustering on the latent space formed by the averaged embedding vectors per training set speaker. In this way, we designate speaker groups and train specialist modules optimized around partitions of the complete training set. Our experiments show that ensemble models made upmore »of low-capacity specialists can outperform high-capacity generalist models with greater efficiency and improved adaptation towards unseen test-time speakers.« less
4. Toward a generalizable deep CNN for neural drive estimation across muscles and participants

   https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/acae0b  

   Wen, Yue ; Kim, Sangjoon J. ; Avrillon, Simon ; Levine, Jackson T. ; Hug, François ; Pons, José L. ( January 2023 , Journal of Neural Engineering)

   Objective.High-density electromyography (HD-EMG) decomposition algorithms are used to identify individual motor unit (MU) spike trains, which collectively constitute the neural code of movements, to predict motor intent. This approach has advanced from offline to online decomposition, from isometric to dynamic contractions, leading to a wide range of neural-machine interface applications. However, current online methods need offline retraining when applied to the same muscle on a different day or to a different person, which limits their applications in a real-time neural-machine interface. We proposed a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) framework for neural drive estimation, which takes in frames of HD-EMG signals as input, extracts general spatiotemporal properties of MU action potentials, and outputs the number of spikes in each frame. The deep CNN can generalize its application without retraining to HD-EMG data recorded in separate sessions, muscles, or participants.Approach.We recorded HD-EMG signals from the vastus medialis and vastus lateralis muscles from five participants while they performed isometric contractions during two sessions separated by ∼20 months. We identified MU spike trains from HD-EMG signals using a convolutive blind source separation (BSS) method, and then used the cumulative spike train (CST) of these MUs and the HD-EMG signals to train andmore »validate the deep CNN.Main results.On average, the correlation coefficients between CST from the BSS and that from deep CNN were$0.983\pm 0.006$for leave-one-out across-sessions-and-muscles validation and$0.989\pm 0.002$for leave-one-out across-participants validation. When trained with more than four datasets, the performance of deep CNN saturated at$0.984\pm 0.001$for cross validations across muscles, sessions, and participants.Significance.We can conclude that the deep CNN is generalizable across the aforementioned conditions without retraining. We could potentially generate a robust deep CNN to estimate neural drive to muscles for neural-machine interfaces.

   « less
5. Text-Independent Speaker Verification Using 3D Convolutional Neural Networks

   https://doi.org/10.1109/ICME.2018.8486441  

   Torfi, Amirsina ; Dawson, Jeremy ; Nasrabadi, Nasser M. ( July 2018 , IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME))

   In this paper, a novel method using 3D Convolutional Neural Network (3D-CNN) architecture has been proposed for speaker verification in the text-independent setting. One of the main challenges is the creation of the speaker models. Most of the previously-reported approaches create speaker models based on averaging the extracted features from utterances of the speaker, which is known as the d-vector system. In our paper, we propose an adaptive feature learning by utilizing the 3D-CNN s for direct speaker model creation in which, for both development and enrollment phases, an identical number of spoken utterances per speaker is fed to the network for representing the speakers' utterances and creation of the speaker model. This leads to simultaneously capturing the speaker-related information and building a more robust system to cope with within-speaker variation. We demonstrate that the proposed method significantly outperforms the traditional d-vector verification system. Moreover, the proposed system can also be an alternative to the traditional d-vector system which is a one-shot speaker modeling system by utilizing 3D-CNNs.