2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.specom.2010.12.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Romanian speech synthesis (RSS) corpus: Building a high quality HMM-based speech synthesis system using a high sampling rate

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
16
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(22 reference statements)
2
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…• The LTS lexicon used in our validation process contains two sub-datasets: the CMUDictionary (Weide, 2005) and the Romanian Speech Synthesis Database (Stan et al, 2011);…”
Section: Corpora Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• The LTS lexicon used in our validation process contains two sub-datasets: the CMUDictionary (Weide, 2005) and the Romanian Speech Synthesis Database (Stan et al, 2011);…”
Section: Corpora Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Statistical parametric speech synthesis system (Zen et al, 2009) has been widely studied recently. Its flexibility in generating speech in other languages like Korean (Sang-Jin et al, 2006) and Romanian (Stan et al, 2011) becomes the preference of most researchers. Moreover, the quality of speech generated from this method has reached a satisfactory level if compared with unit selection method (Karaiskos et al, 2008).…”
Section: Comparison Of State-of-the-art Speech Synthesis Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By reviewing works done by other researchers (Stan et al, 2011), database was created by randomly collect the words from articles, story books, newspapers and online resources. This might possess risks because not all diphonewould exist in the database.…”
Section: Comparison Of State-of-the-art Speech Synthesis Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The intelligibility test was based on [8], and evaluators listened to the given set of utterances as many times as they wanted before typing in what they had heard. The intelligibility of the utterances was evaluated at word level, each correct word being given a score of 1 and incorrect words a score of 0.…”
Section: Evaluation Of Hmm-based Synthetic Speechmentioning
confidence: 99%