Patent Grant
7069216
The invention relates to text-to-speech systems, and more specifically, to translation of speech prosody descriptions from one prosodic representation to another.
Prosody refers to characteristics that contribute to the melodic and rhythmic vividness of speech. Some examples of these characteristics include pitch, loudness, and syllabic duration. Concatenative speech synthesis systems that use a small unit inventory typically have a prosody-prediction component (as well as other signal manipulation techniques). But such a prosody-prediction component is generally not able to recreate the prosodic richness found in natural speech. As a result, the prosody of these systems is too dull to be convincingly human.
One previous approach to prosody generation used instance-based learning techniques for classification [See, for example, “Machine Learning”, Tom M. Mitchell, McGraw-Hill Series in Computer Science, 1997; incorporated herein by reference]. In contrast to learning methods that construct a general explicit description of the target function when training examples are provided, instance-based learning methods simply store the training examples. Generalizing beyond these examples is postponed until a new instance must be classified. Each time a new query instance is encountered, its relationship to the previously stored examples is examined in order to assign a target function value for the new instance. The family of instance-based learning includes nearest neighbor and locally weighted regression methods that assume instances can be represented as points in a Euclidean space. It also includes case-based reasoning methods that use more complex, symbolic representations for instances. A key advantage to this kind of delayed, or lazy, learning is that instead of estimating the target function once for the entire space, these methods can estimate it locally and differently for each new instance to be classified.
One specific approach to prosody generation using instance-based learning was described in F. Malfrère, T. Dutoit, P. Mertens, “Automatic Prosody Generation Using Suprasegmental Unit Selection,” in Proc. of ESCA/COCOSDA Workshop on Speech Synthesis, Jenolan Caves, Australia, 1998; incorporated herein by reference. A system is described that uses prosodic databases extracted from natural speech to generate the rhythm and intonation of texts written in French. The rhythm of the synthetic speech is generated with a CART tree trained on a large mono-speaker speech corpus. The acoustic aspect of the intonation is derived from the same speech corpus. At synthesis time, patterns are chosen on the fly from the database so as to minimize a total selection cost composed of a pattern target cost and a pattern concatenation cost. The patterns that are used in the selection mechanism describe intonation on a symbolic level as a series of accent types. The elementary units that are used for intonation generation are intonational groups which consist of a sequence of syllables. This prosody generation algorithm is currently freely available from the EULER framework for the development of TTS systems for non-commercial and non-military applications at http://tcts.fpms.ac.be/synthesis/euler.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,905,972 “Prosodic Databases Holding Fundamental Frequency Templates For Use In Speech Synthesis” (incorporated herein by reference) describes an algorithm that is very similar to the one in Malfrère et al. Prosodic templates are identified by a tonal emphasis marker pattern, which is matched with a pattern that is predicted from text. The patterns (or templates) consist of a sequence of tonal markings applied on syllables: high emphasis, low emphasis, no special emphasis. Only fundamental frequency (f0) contours are generated by this method, no phoneme duration.
Embodiments of the present invention include a corpus-based prosody translation method using instance-based learning. Training data consists of a large database of natural speech descriptions, including a description of the prosodic realization called a prosody track (defined in the Glossary below). The prosody track may contain a broad description (e.g., coded contours), a narrow description (e.g., acoustic information such as pitch, energy and duration), and/or a description between these extremes (e.g., syllable-based ToBI labels, sentence accents, word-based prominence labels). The descriptions can also be considered as hierarchical, from high level symbolic descriptions such as word prominence and sentence accents; through medium level descriptions such as ToBI labels; to low level acoustic descriptions such as pitch, energy, and duration.
One or more of these prosody tracks for a particular input message (see the Glossary) is intended to be mapped to one or more other prosody tracks. In a prosody prediction application such as TTS, a high- or medium-level input prosody track is converted to a low-level prosody track output. In a prosody labeling application such for prosody scoring in an educational language-tutoring system, a low-level input is converted to a high-level prosody track output. Some differences between the prior art approaches and the approach that we describe include:
Our approach uses a novel choice of short speech units (SSUs—see the Glossary) as the elementary speech units for speech synthesis prosody prediction (mapping a higher-level prosody track to a lower-level prosody track). Previously, prosody prediction used syllables or even larger units as typical elementary speech units. This was because prosody traditionally was viewed as a supra-segmental phenomenon. So it seemed logical to base unit selection on a supra-segmental elementary speech unit. In the past, SSUs such as diphones were introduced mainly to incorporate coarticulation effects for concatenative speech synthesis systems, not to solve a prosody prediction problem. But we choose to generate prosody using SSUs as the elementary speech unit.
An important advantage of using small units to assemble a new prosodic contour is that more prosodic variation results than when large prototype contours are used. Symbolic descriptions of prosody can be based on various different kinds of phonetic or prosodic units—including syllables (e.g., ToBI, sentence accents) and words (e.g., word prominence, inter-word prosodic boundary strength). Acoustic descriptions of prosody, however, relate to a different smaller scale. For SSUs, the acoustic description can include pitch average and pitch slope, to describe a linear approximation of pitch in a demiphone. This description can be sufficient for dynamic unit selection (as described below).
The translated prosodic description is created by combining specific prosody tracks of SSUs that: (1) match symbolically with the input description, (2) match acoustically to each other at their join points, and (3) match acoustically to a number of context dependent criteria. If only the first criterion was taken into account, a k-Nearest Neighbor algorithm could solve the problem. But the second and third criteria demand a more elaborate approach such as the dynamic unit selection algorithm that is typically used for speech waveform selection in concatenative speech synthesis systems. There are a number of speech-related applications that can use such a system, as outlined in Table 1.
From a phonetic specification (e.g., from a text processor output) known as a target, a typical embodiment produces a high quality prosody description by concatenating prosody tracks of real recorded speech.
The feature extraction text processor 101 converts a text input 102 into a target phoneme-aligned description (PAD—see Glossary) 103 output to the dynamic unit selector 106. The target PAD 103 is a multi-layer internal data sequence that includes phonetic descriptors, symbolic descriptors, and prosodic descriptors. The phonetic descriptors of the target PAD 103 can store prosodic parameters determined by linguistic modules within the text processor 101 (e.g., prediction of phrasing, accentuation, and phoneme duration).
The speech units in the SUD database 104 are organized by SSU classes that are defined based on phonetic classes. For example, two phoneme classes can define a diphone class in the same way that two phonemes define a diphone. Phoneme classes can vary from very narrow to very broad. For example, a narrow phoneme class might be based on phonetic identity according to the theory of phonetics to produce a phoneme→class mapping such as /p/→p and /d/→d. On the other hand, an example of a broad phoneme class might be based on a voiced/unvoiced classification such that the phoneme→class mapping contains mappings such as /p/→U (unvoiced) and /d/→V (voiced).
The SSU lookup file 203 is a table based on phoneme class that contains references of the SSUs in the PAD file 202 and prosodic parameter file 201. Within the SSU lookup file 203, an SSU class index table 204 contains an entry for each SSU phoneme class. These entries describe the location in an SSU reference table 205 of the SSU references belonging to that class. Each SSU reference in the SSU reference table 205 contains a message number for the location of the utterance in the PAD file 202, the phoneme in the PAD file 202 where that SSU starts, the starting time of that SSU in the prosodic parameter file 201, and the duration of that SSU in the prosodic parameter file 201.
The unit selector 106 in
In a typical embodiment, the unit selector 106 calculates a “node cost” (a term taken from Dynamic Programming) for each target unit based on the features that are available from the target PADs 103 and the candidate unit PADs 105. The fit of each candidate to the target specification is determined based on symbolic descriptors (such as phonetic context and prosodic context) and numeric descriptors. Poorly matching candidates may be excluded at this point.
The unit selector 106 also typically calculates “transition costs” (another term from Dynamic Programming) based on acoustic information descriptions of the candidate unit PADs 105 from the SUD database 104. The acoustic information descriptions may include energy, pitch and duration information. The transition cost expresses the error contribution (prosodic mismatch) between successive node elements in a matrix from which the best sequence is chosen. This in turn indicates how well the candidate SSUs can be joined together without causing disturbing prosody quality degradations such as large pitch discontinuities, large rhythm differences, etc.
The effectiveness of the unit selector 106 is related to the choice of cost functions and to the method of combining the costs from the various features. One specific embodiment uses of a family of complex cost functions as described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/438,603, filed Nov. 12, 1999, and incorporated herein by reference.
The segmental prosody concatenator 108 requests the prosodic parameter tracks 109 of the selected units 107 from the SUD database 104. The individual prosody tracks of the selected units 107 are concatenated to form an output prosody track 110 that corresponds to for the target input text 102. The prosodic parameter tracks 109 can be smoothed by interpolation. After unit selection is performed once for a particular input text 102, multiple prosody track outputs 110 can be extracted from the best sequence of candidates—each output representing the evolution in time of a different prosodic parameter. For example, after a single unit selection operation, one specific embodiment can extract all of the following prosody track outputs 110: ToBI labels (labels expressed as a function of syllable index), prominence labels (labels expressed as a function of word index), and a pitch contour (pitch expressed as a function of time).
Application of a Corpus-Based Prosody Generator in a TTS System
This downscaling can be realized by using a corpus-based prosody generator 303. The general approach is to remove actual waveforms from the waveform corpus 302, but at the same time keep the full transcription of these waveforms available in the descriptor corpus 301. The prosody generator 303 uses this full descriptor corpus 301 to create the prosody track 304 for the speech output 305 from the target input text 306. The waveform selector 307 can then take the generated prosody track 304 as one of the features used to select waveform references 308 from the descriptor corpus 301 for the waveform concatenator 309. The waveform concatenator 309 uses these waveform references 308 to determine which speech unit waveforms 310 to retrieve from the waveform corpus 302. The prosody track 304 generated by the corpus-based prosody generator 303 can also be used by the waveform concatenator 309 to adjust the prosodic parameters of the retrieved speech unit waveforms 310 before they are concatenated to create the desired synthetic speech output 305.
Most of the foregoing description relates to the application of an embodiment for prosody prediction in a text-to-speech synthesis system. But the invention is not limited to text-to-speech synthesis and can be useful in a variety of other applications. These include without limitation use as a prosody labeler in a speech tutoring system to guide someone learning a language, use as a prosody labeling tool to produce databases for prosody research, and use in an automatic speech recognition system.
This scalable corpus-based system can combine the corpus-based synthesis approach with the small unit inventory approach. The properties of three types of systems are compared below:
This application claims benefit 60/236,475 Sep. 29, 2000.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4994983 | Landell et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5140639 | Sprague et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5636325 | Farrett | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5740320 | Itoh | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5940797 | Abe | Aug 1999 | A |
| 6064960 | Bellegarda et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6173262 | Hirschberg | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6366883 | Campbell et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6411932 | Molnar et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6499014 | Chihara | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6665641 | Coorman et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6738745 | Navratil et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20020152073 A1 | Oct 2002 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 60236475 | Sep 2000 | US |
| Child | 09969117 | US |
