• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Special Offers
Business Intelligence Info
  • Business Intelligence
    • BI News and Info
    • Big Data
    • Mobile and Cloud
    • Self-Service BI
  • CRM
    • CRM News and Info
    • InfusionSoft
    • Microsoft Dynamics CRM
    • NetSuite
    • OnContact
    • Salesforce
    • Workbooks
  • Data Mining
    • Pentaho
    • Sisense
    • Tableau
    • TIBCO Spotfire
  • Data Warehousing
    • DWH News and Info
    • IBM DB2
    • Microsoft SQL Server
    • Oracle
    • Teradata
  • Predictive Analytics
    • FICO
    • KNIME
    • Mathematica
    • Matlab
    • Minitab
    • RapidMiner
    • Revolution
    • SAP
    • SAS/SPSS
  • Humor

Researchers claim masks muffle speech, but not enough to impede speech recognition

September 12, 2020   Big Data

Automation and Jobs

Read our latest special issue.

Open Now

Health organizations including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and the U.K. National Health Service advocate wearing masks to prevent the spread of infection. But masks attenuate speech, which has implications for the accuracy of speech recognition systems like Google Assistant, Alexa, and Siri. In an effort to quantify the degree to which mask materials impact acoustics, researchers at the University of Illinois conducted a study examining 12 different types of face coverings in total. They found that transparent masks had the worst acoustics compared with both medical and cloth masks, but that most masks had “little effect” on lapel microphones, suggesting existing systems might be able to recognize muffled speech without issue.

While it’s intuitive to assume mask-distorted speech would prove to be challenging for speech recognition, the evidence so far paints a mixed picture. Research published by the Educational Testing Service (ETS) concluded that while differences existed between recordings of mask wearers and those who didn’t wear masks during an English proficiency exam, the distortion didn’t lead to “significant” variations in automated exam scoring. In a separate study, scientists at Duke Kunshan University, Lenovo, and Wuhan University found an AI system could be trained to detect whether someone’s wearing a mask from the sound of their muffled speech.

A Google spokesperson told VentureBeat there hasn’t been a measurable impact on the company’s speech recognition systems since the start of the pandemic, when mask-wearing became more common. Amazon also says it hasn’t observed a shift in speech recognition accuracy correlated with mask-wearing.

The University of Illinois researchers looked at the acoustic effects of a polypropylene surgical mask, N95 and KN95 respirators, six cloth masks made from different fabrics, two cloth masks with transparent windows, and a plastic shield. They took measurements within an “acoustically-treated” lab using a head-shaped loudspeaker and a human volunteer, both of whom had microphones placed on and near their lapel, cheek, forehead, and mouth. (The head-shaped loudspeaker, which was made of plywood, used a two-inch driver with a pattern close to that of a human speaker.)

 Researchers claim masks muffle speech, but not enough to impede speech recognition

After taking measurements without face coverings to establish a baseline, the researchers set the loudspeaker on a turntable and rotated it to capture various angles of the tested masks. Then, for each mask, they had the volunteer speak in three 30-second increments at a constant volume.

The results show that most masks had “little effect” below a frequency of 1kHz but were muffled at higher frequencies in varying degrees. The surgical mask and KN95 respirator had peak attenuation of around 4dB, while the N95 attenuated at high frequencies by about 6dB. As for the cloth masks, material and weave proved to be the key variables — 100% cotton masks had the best acoustic performance, while masks made from tightly woven denim and bedsheets performed the worst. Transparent masks blocked between 8dB and 14dB at high frequencies, making them by far the worst of the bunch.

“For all masks tested, acoustic attenuation was strongest in the front. Sound transmission to the side of and behind the talker was less strongly affected by the masks, and the shield amplified sound behind the talker,” the researchers in a paper describing their work. “These results suggest that masks may deflect sound energy to the sides rather than absorbing it. Therefore, it may be possible to use microphones placed to the side of the mask for sound reinforcement.”

The researchers recommend avoiding cotton-spandex masks for the clearest and crispest speech, but they note that recordings captured by the lapel mic showed “small” and “uniform” attenuation — the sort of attenuation that recognition systems can easily correct for. For instance, Amazon recently launched Whisper Mode for Alexa, which taps AI trained on a corpus of professional voice recordings to respond to whispered (i.e., low-decibel) speech by whispering back. An Amazon spokesperson didn’t say whether Whisper Mode is being used to improve masked speech performance, but they told VentureBeat that when Alexa speech recognition systems’ signal-to-noise ratios are lower due to customers wearing masks, engineering teams are able to address fluctuations in confidence through an active learning pipeline.

In any case, assuming the results of the University of Illinois stand up to peer review, they bode well for smart speakers, smart displays, and other voice-powered smart devices. Next time you lift your phone to summon Siri, you shouldn’t have to ditch the mask.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Big Data – VentureBeat

claim, Enough, impede, masks, muffle, recognition, researchers, SPEECH
  • Recent Posts

    • Accelerate Your Data Strategies and Investments to Stay Competitive in the Banking Sector
    • SQL Server Security – Fixed server and database roles
    • Teradata Named a Leader in Cloud Data Warehouse Evaluation by Independent Research Firm
    • Derivative of a norm
    • TODAY’S OPEN THREAD
  • Categories

  • Archives

    • April 2021
    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
© 2021 Business Intelligence Info
Power BI Training | G Com Solutions Limited