-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 689
Adopt aligner from "Huang et al., Less Peaky and More Accurate CTC Forced Alignment by Label Priors" #3826
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Thanks for your interests in our work and sharing the nice results! As we have been switching between projects, things have been greatly delayed. Regarding the plan, I will be more available in late September and October. I will work on it at that time! |
Looking forward to it, thank you! |
A catch up here, if there is any updated plan for incorporating the Huang et al., Less Peaky and More Accurate CTC Forced Alignment by Label Prior to current Pytorch audio aligner! |
Hi @christincha, I am still working on it. Before making it official, if you hope to do any experiments, maybe check this out: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1xciHB1Twi7VFutACrv94-Ejff1-VrjzL?usp=sharing |
Hello, |
🚀 The feature
Consider on-boarding aligner from Huang et al., Less Peaky and More Accurate CTC Forced Alignment by Label Priors (@huangruizhe) to the existing set of aligners given it improves alignment accuracy compared to the existing Wav2Vec2 CTC aligner by up to 60% P50 on English.
Motivation, pitch
Today, torch audio offers Forced Alignment through a simple extendable interface. The recently published aligner Huang et al., Less Peaky and More Accurate CTC Forced Alignment by Label Priors (github) drives the word boundary error (WBE) down (better) compared to Wav2Vec2. We (@dmitry-mli @jamesr66a @websterbei) explored the model and had WBE for our English samples decrease by up to 60% for P50, 45% for P70 and 15% for P95 compared to Wav2Vec2 CTC alignment.
Alternatives
This request is related to a particular research.
Additional context
Thanks for consideration. @huangruizhe @jamesr66a @websterbei
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: