2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/icassp.2018.8462194
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

BSS Eval or Peass? Predicting the Perception of Singing-Voice Separation

Abstract: There is some uncertainty as to whether objective metrics for predicting the perceived quality of audio source separation are sufficiently accurate. This issue was investigated by employing a revised experimental methodology to collect subjective ratings of sound quality and interference of singing-voice recordings that have been extracted from musical mixtures using state-of-the-art audio source separation. A correlation analysis between the experimental data and the measures of two objective evaluation toolk… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The second step provides performance criteria from the computation of energy ratios related to the previous four terms: source to distortion ratio (SDR), source to interferences ratio (SIR), sources to noise ratio and sources to artefacts ratio (SAR). Although a reasonable correlation was found between SIR and human ratings of interference [268], other experiments [27], [268] showed that energy-based measures are not ideal for determining perceptual sound quality for SS algorithms.…”
Section: B Objective Measuresmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The second step provides performance criteria from the computation of energy ratios related to the previous four terms: source to distortion ratio (SDR), source to interferences ratio (SIR), sources to noise ratio and sources to artefacts ratio (SAR). Although a reasonable correlation was found between SIR and human ratings of interference [268], other experiments [27], [268] showed that energy-based measures are not ideal for determining perceptual sound quality for SS algorithms.…”
Section: B Objective Measuresmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Also, the separation algorithm should preserve speech quality. This aspect is evaluated using perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ) [40], which maintains a good correlation with speech intelligibility measures even at lower SNR [45]. Another important challenge of SS systems is speech intelligibility that should not be affected by the separation process.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another important challenge of SS systems is speech intelligibility that should not be affected by the separation process. This aspect is evaluated in terms of STOI [41], which is characterised with a high correlation with speech intelligibility compared to other existing objective intelligibility models [45]. The proposed approach is evaluated and compared to other states-of-the-art approaches.…”
Section: Experiments 2: Evaluation Of the Whole Separation Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As previously mentioned, a unified, robust and perceptually valid MSS quality evaluation procedure does not yet exist. Even while new alternatives for evaluation have been explored in recent years [30], listening tests remain the only reliable quality evaluation method to date.…”
Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%