Metadata-based diarization of teleconferences

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11276407
  • Patent Number
    11,276,407
  • Date Filed
    Monday, March 11, 2019
    5 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 15, 2022
    2 years ago
Abstract
A method for audio processing includes receiving, in a computer, a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference. The audio stream is processed by the computer to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream. The conference metadata are parsed so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference. The teleconference is diarized by labeling the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from corresponding periods of the teleconference.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to methods, apparatus and software for speech analysis, and particularly to automated diarization of conversations between multiple speakers.


BACKGROUND

Speaker diarization is the process of partitioning an audio stream containing voice data into time segments according to the identity of the speaker in each segment.


It can be combined with automatic transcription of the audio stream in order to give an accurate rendition of the conversation during a conference, for example.


Speaker diarization is sometimes used in analyzing the sequence of speakers in a video teleconference. For example, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0300939 describes a method that includes receiving a media file that includes video data and audio data; determining an initial scene sequence in the media file; determining an initial speaker sequence in the media file; and updating a selected one of the initial scene sequences and the initial speaker sequence in order to generate an updated scene sequence and an updated speaker sequence respectively.


SUMMARY

Embodiments of the present invention that are described hereinbelow provide improved methods, apparatus and software for automated analysis of conversations.


There is therefore provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, a method for audio processing, which includes receiving, in a computer, a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference. The audio stream is processed by the computer to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream. The conference metadata are parsed so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference. The teleconference is diarized by labeling the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from corresponding periods of the teleconference.


In a disclosed embodiment, processing the audio stream includes applying a voice activity detector to identify as the speech segments parts of the audio stream in which a power of the audio signal exceeds a specified threshold.


Additionally or alternatively, labeling the identified speech segments measuring and compensating for a delay in transmission of the audio stream over the network relative to timestamps associated with the conference metadata.


In some embodiments, diarizing the teleconference includes labeling a first set of the identified speech segments with the speaker identifications extracted from the corresponding periods of the teleconference, extracting acoustic features from the speech segments in the first set, and labeling a second set of the identified speech segments using the extracted acoustic features to indicate the participants who spoke during the speech segments.


In one embodiment, labeling the second set includes labeling one or more of the speech segments for which the conference metadata did not provide a speaker identification. Additionally or alternatively, labeling the second set includes correcting one or more of the speaker identifications of the speech segments in the first set using the extracted audio characteristics.


In a disclosed embodiment, extracting the acoustic features includes building a respective statistical model of the speech of each participant based on the audio stream in the first set of the speech segments that were labeled as belonging to the participant, and labeling the second set includes comparing the statistical model to each of a sequence of time frames in the audio stream.


Additionally or alternatively, labeling the second set includes estimating transition probabilities between the speaker identifications based on the labeled speech segments in the first set, and applying the transition probabilities in labeling the second set of the speech segments. In one embodiment, applying the transition probabilities includes applying a dynamic programming algorithm over a series of time frames in the audio stream in order to identify a likeliest sequence of the participants to have spoken over the series of time frames.


Further additionally or alternatively, diarizing the teleconference includes extracting the acoustic features from the speech segments in the second set, and applying the extracted acoustic features in further refining a segmentation of the audio stream.


In some embodiments, the method includes analyzing speech patterns in the teleconference using the labeled speech segments. Analyzing the speech patterns may include measuring relative durations of speech by the participants and/or measuring a level of interactivity between the participants. Additionally or alternatively, analyzing the speech patterns includes correlating the speech patterns of a group of salespeople over multiple teleconferences with respective sales made by the salespeople in order to identify an optimal speech pattern.


There is also provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, apparatus for audio processing, including a memory, which is configured to store a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference. A processor is configured to process the audio stream so as to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream, to parse the conference metadata so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference, and to diarize the teleconference by labeling the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from corresponding periods of the teleconference.


There is additionally provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, a computer software product, including a non-transitory computer-readable medium in which program instructions are stored, which instructions, when read by a computer, cause the computer to store a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference, and to process the audio stream so as to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream, to parse the conference metadata so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference, and to diarize the teleconference by labeling the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from corresponding periods of the teleconference.


The present invention will be more fully understood from the following detailed description of the embodiments thereof, taken together with the drawings in which:





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is schematic pictorial illustration of a teleconferencing system, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 2 is a flow chart that schematically illustrates a method for automatic analysis of a conference call, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;



FIGS. 3A-3D are bar plots that schematically illustrate successive stages in segmentation of a conversation, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;



FIGS. 4A-4C are bar plots that schematically show details in the process of segmenting a conversation, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 5 is a flow chart that schematically illustrates a method for refining the segmentation of a conversation, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;



FIGS. 6A-6D are bar plots that schematically show details in the process of segmenting a conversation, in accordance with another embodiment of the invention; and



FIG. 7 is a bar chart that schematically shows results of diarization of multiple conversations involving a group of different speakers, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

Methods of automatic speaker diarization that are known in the art tend to achieve only coarse segmentation and labeling of a multi-speaker conversation. In some applications, more accurate diarization is required.


For example, the operator or manager of a call center may wish to use automatic diarization to analyze the conversations held by salespeople with customers in order to understand and improve their sales skills and increase their success rate. In this context, the customer's overall speaking time is usually much smaller than that of the salesperson. On the other hand, detecting the customer's speech segments can be of higher importance in analyzing the conversation, including even short utterances (for example, “OK” or “aha”). Inaccurate diarization can lead to loss or misclassification of important cues like these, and thus decrease the effectiveness of the call analysis.


Some embodiments of the present invention that are described herein address these problems by using cues outside the audio stream itself. These embodiments are directed specifically to analyzing Web-based teleconferences, in which conferencing software transmits images and metadata that enable the participants to view a display on a video screen showing the conference participants and/or other information in conjunction with the audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants. Specifically, standard teleconferencing software applications automatically identify the participant who is speaking during successive periods of the teleconference, and transmit the speaker identification as part of the metadata stream that is transmitted to the participants. In some embodiments, the metadata comprises code in a markup language, such as the Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), which is used by client software on the participants' computers in driving the display during the teleconference; but other sorts of metadata may alternatively be used for the present purposes.


In the present embodiments, a diarizing computer receives a recording of the audio stream and corresponding metadata of a Web-based teleconference. The computer processes the audio stream to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream. The computer also parses the conference metadata so as to extract the speaker identifications, and then diarizes the teleconference by labeling the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from corresponding periods of the teleconference. The metadata is useful in resolving the uncertainty that often arises in determining which participant is speaking at any given time on the basis of the audio stream alone, and thus improves the quality of diarization, as well as the accuracy of transcription and analysis of the teleconference based on the diarization.


In many cases, however, the speaker identification provided by the conference metadata is still not sufficiently “fine-grained,” in the sense that the minimal periods over which a speaker may be identified are long (typically on the order of at least one second). Precise diarization, particularly in short segments, can also be confused by network transmission delays and by segments in which more than one participant was speaking.


Therefore, in some embodiments of the present invention, after labeling a first set of speech segments using the conference metadata, the computer refines the speaker identifications on the basis of acoustic features extracted from the speech segments in this first set. In some embodiments, the computer develops a model, using these acoustic features, which indicates the likeliest speaker in each segment of the conversation, including even very short segments. This model is applied in analyzing and labeling a second set of the identified speech segments, instead of or in addition to the metadata-based labeling. In some cases, the labels of some of the speech segments in the first set, which were based on the metadata, are also corrected using the model.


The results of this fine-grained diarization can be used for various purposes, such as accurate, automatic transcription and analysis of conversation patterns. In one embodiment, the diarization is used in comparing sales calls made by different members of a sales team, in order to identify patterns of conversation that correlate with successful sales. The sales manager can use this information, for example, in coaching the members of the team to improve points in their conversational approach.


System Description


FIG. 1 is schematic pictorial illustration of a teleconferencing system 20, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. A computer, such as a server 22, receives and records conversations conducted via a network 24, among pairs or groups of participants 30, 31, 32, 33, . . . , using respective computers 26, 27, 28, 29, Network 24 may comprise any suitable data communication network, such as the Internet. Computers 26, 27, 28, 29, . . . , may comprise any sort of computing devices with a suitable audio interface and video display, including both desktop and portable devices, such a laptops, tablets and smartphones.


The data stream among computers 26, 27, 28, 29, . . . , that is recorded by server 22 includes both an audio stream, containing speech uttered by the participants, and conference metadata. Server 22 may receive audio input from the conversations on line in real time, or it may, additionally or alternatively, receive recordings made and stored by other means. The conference metadata typically has the form of textual code in HTML or another markup language, for controlling the teleconference display on the video screens viewed by the participants. The conference metadata is typically generated by third-party teleconferencing software, separate from and independent of server 22. As one example, server 22 may capture and collect recordings of Web conferences using the methods described in U.S. Pat. No. 9,699,409, whose disclosure is incorporated herein by reference.


Server 22 comprises a processor 36, such as a general-purpose computer processor, which is connected to network 24 by a network interface 34. Server 22 receives and stores a corpus of recorded conversations in memory 38, for processing by processor 36. Processor 36 autonomously diarizes the conversations, and may also transcribe the conversations and/or analyze the patterns of speech by the participants. At the conclusion of this process, processor 36 is able to present the distribution of the segments of the conversations and the respective labeling of the segments according to the participant speaking in each segment over the duration of the recorded conversations on a display 40.


Processor 36 typically carries out the functions that are described herein under the control of program instructions in software. This software may be downloaded to server 22 in electronic form, for example over a network. Additionally or alternatively, the software may be provided and/or stored on tangible, non-transitory computer-readable media, such as optical, magnetic, or electronic memory media.


Labeling Speech Segments Using Conference Metadata

Reference is now made to FIGS. 2 and 3A-D, which schematically illustrate a method for automatic analysis of a conference call, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing the steps of the method, while FIGS. 3A-3D are bar plots that illustrate successive stages in segmentation of a conversation. For the sake of concreteness and clarity, the method will be described hereinbelow with reference to processor 36 and the elements of system 20, and specifically to a teleconference between participants 30 and 33, using respective computers 26 and 29. The principles of this method, however, may be applied to larger numbers of participants and may be implemented in other sorts of Web-based conferencing systems and computational configurations.


In order to begin the analysis of a conversation, processor 36 captures both an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and coarse speaker identity data from the conversation, at a data capture step 50. The speaker identity data has the form of metadata, such as HTML, which is provided by the teleconferencing software and transmitted over network 24. The teleconferencing software may apply various heuristics in deciding on the speaker identity at any point in time, and the actual method that is applied for this purpose is beyond the scope of the present description. The result is that at each of a sequence of points in time during the conversation, the metadata indicates the identity of the participant who is speaking, or may indicate that multiple participants are speaking or that no one is speaking.


To extract the relevant metadata, processor 36 may parse the structure of the Web pages transmitted by the teleconferencing application. It then applies identification rules managed within server 22 to determine which parts of the page indicate speaker identification labels. For example, the identification rules may indicate the location of a table in the HTML hierarchy of the page, and classes or identifiers (IDs) of HTML elements may be used to traverse the HTML tree and determine the area of the page containing the speaker identification labels. Additional rules may indicate the location of specific identification labels. For example, if the relevant area of the page is implemented using an HTML table tag, individual speaker identification labels may be implemented using HTML <tr> tags. In such a case, processor 36 can use the browser interface, and more specifically the document object model application program interface (DOM API), to locate the elements of interest. Alternatively, if the teleconferencing application is a native application, such as a Microsoft Windows® native application, processor 36 may identify the elements in the application using the native API, for example the Windows API.


An extracted metadata stream of this sort is shown, for example, in Table I below:


Table I—Speaker Identity Metadata



  • {“time”:36.72, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Marie Antoinette”}]}}

  • {“time”:36.937, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Marie Antoinette”}]}}

  • {“time”:37.145, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Marie Antoinette”}]}}

  • {“time”:37.934, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[ ]}}

  • {“time”:38.123,“type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”,“data”: (“speakers”:[ ]}}

  • {“time”:38.315,“type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”,“data”: (“speakers”:[ ]}}

  • {“time”:41.556, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Marie Antoinette”}]}}

  • {“time”:41.754, “type”: “SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Marie Antoinette”}, {“name”:“Louis XVI”}]}}

  • {“time”:42.069, “type”: “SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Louis XVI”}]}}

  • {“time”:44.823, “type”: “SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Louis XVI”}]}}

  • {“time”:46.923, “type”:“SpeakersSamplingEvent”, “data”: (“speakers”:[{“name”:“Louis XVI”}]}}



The speaker identity metadata are shown graphically as a bar plot 52 in FIG. 3A, corresponding to approximately one minute of a conference. Segments 54 and 56 are identified unequivocally in the metadata as belonging to participants 30 and 33, respectively, meaning that the teleconferencing software identified participant 30 as the speaker during segment 54, and participant 33 as the speaker during segment 56. The teleconferencing software was unable to identify any speaker during a segment 58 (perhaps because both participants were silent), and therefore, no speaker is associated with this segment. Another segment 62 is also identified with participant 33, but is interrupted by two uncertain sub-segments 60, in which the metadata indicate that the identity of the speaker is unclear, for example because of background noise or both participants speaking at once.


To facilitate labeling of audio segments, processor 36 filters the raw metadata received from the conferencing data stream to remove ambiguities and gaps. For example, the processor may merge adjacent speaker labels and close small gaps between labels. FIG. 3B shows the result of applying this process to the segments of the preceding figure as a bar plot 64.


Returning now to FIG. 2, processor 36 applies a voice activity detector to the actual audio stream, and thus identifies the segments in which one of the participants was speaking, at a voice detection step 66. For example, processor 36 may identify as speech any segment in the audio stream in which the power of the audio signal exceeded a specified threshold. Alternatively or additionally, spectral and/or temporal criteria may be applied in order to distinguish speech segments from noise. FIG. 3C shows the result of this step as a bar plot 68, containing speech segments 70 interspersed with periods of silence. This step does not typically identify which participant was speaking during each segment 70.


Processor 36 applies the filtered metadata extracted at step 50 to the voice activity data obtained from step 66 in labeling speech segments 70, at a segment labeling step 72. Speech segments 70 in the audio stream are labeled at step 66 when they can be mapped consistently to exactly one metadata label. (Examples of difficulties that can occur in this process are explained below with reference to FIGS. 4A-4C.) FIG. 3D shows the result of this step as a bar plot 74. Segments 76 are now labeled as belonging to participant 30, while segments 80 are labeled as belonging to participant 33. The labeling of segments 78, however, remains ambiguous, because the metadata captured at step 50 did not identify the speakers during these segments. Segments 78 therefore have no speaker labels at this stage.



FIGS. 4A-4C are bar plots 82, 84 and 92, respectively, that schematically show details in the process of segmenting a conversation, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. In these figures, the numbers marked above and below the bar plots refer to the beginning and ending times of the segments appearing in the plots. Bar plot 82 includes a voice activity segment 86, which appears to cross the boundary between two segments 88 and 90 in bar plot 84, which have different, respective speaker labels in the conference metadata. The reason for the discrepancy between the audio and metadata streams is a delay in transmission of the audio stream over network 24, relative to the timestamps applied in the conference metadata.


To compensate for this discrepancy, processor 36 may estimate the delay in network transmission between computers 26 and 29, as well as between these computers and server 22. For this purpose, for example, processor 36 may transmit and receive test packets over network 24. Additionally or alternatively, processor 36 may infer the delay by comparing the patterns of segments in bar plots 82 and 84. In the present example, the delay is found to be about 1 sec, and processor 36 therefore matches voice activity segment 86 to metadata segment 90. As a result, bar plot 92 in FIG. 4C shows that original voice activity segment 86 has now become a labeled segment 94, in which participant 30 is identified as the speaker.


Returning again to FIG. 2, at this point processor 36 will generally have labeled most of the segments of the audio stream, as illustrated by segments 76 and 80 in FIG. 3D. Some segments, however, such as segments 78, may remain unlabeled, because the conference metadata did not provide speaker identifications that could be matched to these latter segments unambiguously. Furthermore, short segments in which one of the participants was speaking may have been incorrectly merged at this stage with longer segments that were identified with another speaker, or may have been incorrectly labeled.


To rectify these problems and thus provide finer-grained analysis, processor 36 refines the initial segmentation in order to derive a finer, more reliable segmentation of the audio stream, at a refinement step 96. For this purpose, as noted earlier, processor 36 extracts acoustic features from the speech segments that were labeled at step 72 based on the conference metadata. The processor applies these acoustic features in building a model, which can be optimized to maximize the likelihood that each segment of the conversation will be correctly associated with a single speaker. This model can be used both in labeling the segments that could not be labeled at step 72 (such as segments 78) and in correcting the initial labeling by relabeling, splitting and/or merging the existing segments. Techniques that can be applied in implementing step 96 are described below in greater detail.


Once this refinement of the segment labeling has been completed, processor 36 automatically extracts and analyzes features of the participants' speech during the conference, at an analysis step 98. For example, processor 36 may apply the segmentation in accurately transcribing the conference, so that the full dialog is available in textual form. Additionally or alternatively, processor 36 may analyze the temporal patterns of interaction between the conference participants, without necessarily considering the content of the discussion.


Refinement of Segmentation and Labeling


FIG. 5 is a flow chart that schematically shows details of a method for refining the segmentation of a conversation, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. Processor 36 can apply this method in implementing step 96 (FIG. 2). The present method uses a statistical model, such as a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM), to characterize the speakers in the conversation, together with a state-based model, such as a Hidden Markov Model (HMM), to track transitions between speakers. Alternatively, other refinement techniques can be applied at step 96. Furthermore, the present method can be used in refining an initial segmentation that was accomplished by other means, as well, not necessarily based on conference metadata.


To begin the refinement process, processor 36 defines a set of speaker states, corresponding to the speakers identified by the conference metadata (step 50 in FIG. 2), at a state definition step 100. Given N speakers, processor 36 will define N+1 corresponding states, wherein state zero is associated with silence. In addition, processor 36 divides the audio recording (received at step 66) into a series of T time frames and extracts acoustic features xt from the audio signal in each time frame t∈[1,T], at a feature extraction step 102. Typically, the time frames are short, for example as short as 25 ms, and may overlap with one another. The acoustic features may be defined using any suitable criteria that are known in the art, for example using Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs), i-vectors, or neural network embedding.


For each state i∈{0,N}, processor 36 builds a respective statistical model, based on the segments of the audio stream that were labeled previously (for example, at step 72) with specific speaker identities, at a model construction step 104. In other words, each state i is associated with a corresponding participant; and processor 36 uses the features of the audio signals recorded during the segments during which participant i was identified as the speaker in building the statistical model for the corresponding state. Any suitable sort of statistical model that is known in the art may be used for this purpose. In the present embodiment, processor 36 builds a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) for each state, G(x|s=i), i.e., a superposition of Gaussian distributions with K centers, corresponding to the mean values for participant i of the K statistical features extracted at step 102. The covariance matrix of the models may be constrained, for example, diagonal.


The set of speaker states can be expanded to include situations other than silence and a single participant speaking. For example, a “background” or “multi-speaker” state can be added and characterized using all speakers or pairs of speakers, so that the model will be able to recognize and handle two participants talking simultaneously. Time frames dominated by background noises, such as music, typing sounds, and audio event indicators, can also be treated as distinct states.


Based on the labeled segments, processor 36 also builds a matrix of the transition probabilities T(j|i) between the states in the model, meaning the probability that after participant i spoke during time frame t, participant j will be the speaker in time frame t+1:







T


(

j

i

)


=


Pr


(


s

t
+
1


=


j


s
t


=
i


)


=





s
t

=
i





δ


(


s

t
+
1


,
j

)


/





s
t

=
i



1









Here st is the state in frame t, and δ is the Kronecker delta function. The transition matrix will typically be strongly diagonal (meaning that in the large majority of time frames, the speaker will be the same as the speaker in the preceding time frame). The matrix may be biased to favor transitions among speakers using additive smoothing of the off-diagonal elements, such Laplace add-one smoothing.


Processor 36 also uses the state st in each labeled time frame t to estimate the start probability P(j) for each state j by using the marginal observed probability:







P


(
j
)


=


Pr


(


s
t

=
j

)


=




t
=
1

T








δ


(


s
t

,
j

)


/
T








Here again, smoothing may be used to bias the probabilities of states with low rates of occurrence.


Using the statistical model developed at step 104 and the probabilities calculated at step 106, processor 36 applies a dynamic programming algorithm in order to find the likeliest sequence of speakers over all of the time frames t=0, 1, . . . , T, at a speaker path computation step 108. For example, processor 36 may apply the Viterbi algorithm at this step, which will give, for each time frame, an identification of the participant likeliest to have spoken in that time frame, along with a measure of confidence in the identification, i.e., a probability value that the speaker state in the given time frame is correct. Before performing the speaker path computation, processor 36 may add chains of internal states to the model, for example by duplicating each speaker state multiple times and concatenating them with a certain transition probability. These added states create an internal Markov chain, which enforces minimal speaker duration and thus suppresses spurious transitions.


As a result of the computation at step 108, time frames in segments of the audio stream that were not labeled previously will now have speaker states associated with them. Furthermore, the likeliest-path computation may assign speaker states to time frames in certain segments of the audio stream that are different from the participant labels that were previously attached to these segments.


Processor 36 uses these new speaker state identifications in refining the segmentation of the audio stream, at a segmentation refinement step 110. To avoid errors at this stage, the processor typically applies a threshold to the speaker state probability values, so that only speaker state identifications having high measures of confidence are used in the resegmentation. Following step 110, some or all of the segments of the conversation that were previously unlabeled may now be assigned labels, indicating the participant who was speaking during each segment or, alternatively, that the segment was silent. Additionally or alternatively, segments or parts of segments that were previously labeled erroneously as belonging to a given participant may be relabeled with the participant who was actually speaking. In some cases, the time borders of the segments may be changed, as well.


In the first iteration through steps 104-110, the speaker identity labels assigned at step 72 (FIG. 2) are used as the baseline for building the statistical model and estimating transition probabilities. Following this first iteration, steps 104-110 may be repeated, this time using the resegmentation that was generated by step 110. One or more additional iterations of this sort will refine the segmentation still further, and will thus provide more accurate diarization of the conference. Processor 36 may continue these repeat iterations until it reaches a stop criterion, such as a target number of iterations or a target overall confidence level.



FIGS. 6A-6D are bar plots that schematically show details in the process of segmenting a conversation using the method of claim 5, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 6A shows a bar plot 112 in which segments 114 and 116 have been identified in the conference metadata (step 50 in FIG. 2). FIG. 6B shows a bar plot 118 in which voice activity segments 120 are identified in the audio stream (step 66 in FIG. 2). In FIG. 6C, a bar plot 122 shows how processor 36 has labeled voice activity segments 120 according to the speaker identifications in plot 112. Segments 124 and 126 are now labeled in accordance with the identities indicated by the speaker identifications of segments 114 and 116. Segments 128, however, remain unlabeled, for example due to uncertainty in the time offset between the audio stream and the metadata timestamps, as explained above.



FIG. 6D is a bar plot 130 showing the results of refinement of the segmentation and labeling following application of the method of FIG. 5. Segments 132 in plot 130 are labeled with the same speaker identification as segments 124 in plot 122, and segments 134 are labeled with the same speaker identification as segments 126. Segments 128, which were unidentified by the conference metadata in plot 122, have now been labeled with the speaker identification of segments 134 based on the refined labeling generated at step 110. Gaps between segments 126 in plot 122 have also been filled in within segments 134. In addition, the metadata-based speaker label of segment 124 beginning at time 38:31.8 in plot 122 has been corrected in the corresponding segment 134 in plot 130.


In the example shown in FIG. 6D, a certain portion of the previous segmentation and labeling were found to disagree with the statistical model and were therefore corrected. In some cases, however, the level of discrepancy between the metadata-based labels and the segmentation and labeling generated by the statistical model may be so great as to cast suspicion on the accuracy of the metadata as a whole. In such cases, processor 36 may revert to blind diarization (irrespective of the conference metadata) as its starting point, or it may alert a human system operator to the discrepancy.


Additionally or alternatively, processor 36 may assign different levels of confidence to the metadata-based labels, thereby accounting for potential errors in the metadata-based segmentation. Furthermore, the processor may ignore speech segments with unidentified speech, as the metadata-based labels of these segments might exhibit more errors. Additionally or alternatively, processor 36 may apply a learning process to identify the parts of a conference in which it is likely that the metadata are correct. Following this learning phase of the algorithm, the processor can predict the segmentation of these segments, as in the example shown in FIGS. 6C-6D.


For example, in one embodiment, processor 36 may implement an artificial neural network. This embodiment treats the labeling and segmentation problem as a “sequence-to-sequence” learning problem, where the neural network learns to predict the coarse segmentation using the speech features as its input.


In this embodiment, a network, such as a convolutional neural network (CNN) or a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN, including networks with long short-term memory [LSTM]cells, Gated Recurrent Units (GRU's), Vanilla RNN's or any other implementation), is used to learn the transformation between acoustic features and speakers. The network is trained to predict the metadata labels on a given conversation. After training is completed, the network predicts the speaker classes without knowledge of the metadata labels, and the network output is used as the output of the resegmentation process.


The network learning process can use either a multiclass architecture, multiple binary classifiers with joint embedding, or multiple binary classifiers without joint embedding. In a multiclass architecture, the network predicts one option from a closed set of options (e.g. Speaker A, Speaker B, Speaker A+B, Silence, Unidentified Speaker etc.). In an architecture of multiple binary classifiers, the network provides multiple predictions, one for each possible speaker, predicting whether the speaker talked during the period (including simultaneously predicting whether Speaker A talked, and whether speaker B talked).


Use of Diarization Results in Coaching Salespeople

In some embodiments of the present invention, server 22 diarizes a large body of calls made by salespeople in a given organization, and outputs the results to a sales manager and/or to the salespeople themselves as an aid in improving their conference behavior. For example, server 22 may measure and output the following parameters, which measure relative durations and timing of speech by the participants (in this case, the salesperson and the customer) in each call:

    • Talk time: What percentage of the conversation is taken up by speech of the salesperson.
    • Longest monologue: How long does the salesperson speak without pausing for feedback. For example, processor 36 may measure the longest segment of continuous speech, allowing for only non-informative interruptions by the customer (such as “a-ha”).
    • Longest customer story: A good salespeople is expected to be able to ask customers open-ended questions. Therefore, the processor measures the longest “story” by the customer, i.e., the longest continuous speech by the customer, allowing for only short interruptions by the salesperson (typically up to 5 sec).
    • Interactivity: How often does the call go back and forth between the parties. This parameter can be assigned a score, for example on a scale of 0 to 10.
    • Patience: How long does the salesperson wait before regaining the conversation after the customer speaks. In other words, does the salesperson wait to ensure that the customer has completed a question or statement, or does the salesperson respond quickly to what might be an incomplete statement?



FIG. 7 is a bar chart that schematically shows results of diarization of multiple conversations involving a group of different speakers, for example salespeople in an organization, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. Each bar 140 shows the relative “talk time” of a respective salesperson, labeled “A” through “P” at the left side of the chart.


Processor 36 may correlate the talk times with sales statistics for each of the salespeople, taken from the customer relations management (CRM) database of the organization, for example. On this basis, processor 36 identifies the optimal speech patterns, such as optimal talk time and other parameters, for maximizing the productivity of sales calls. The salespeople can then receive feedback and coaching on their conversational habits that will enable them to increase their sales productivity.


It will be appreciated that the embodiments described above are cited by way of example, and that the present invention is not limited to what has been particularly shown and described hereinabove. Rather, the scope of the present invention includes both combinations and subcombinations of the various features described hereinabove, as well as variations and modifications thereof which would occur to persons skilled in the art upon reading the foregoing description and which are not disclosed in the prior art.

Claims
  • 1. A method for audio processing, comprising: receiving, in a computer, a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference;processing the audio stream by the computer to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream;parsing the conference metadata so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference; anddiarizing the teleconference based on both acoustic features from the audio stream and the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, in a process comprising: labeling a first set of the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, wherein each speech segment from the audio stream, in the first set, is labelled with a speaker identification of a period corresponding to a time of the segment;extracting acoustic features from the speech segments in the first set;learning a correlation between the speaker identifications labelled to the segments in the first set, and the extracted acoustic features extracted from the corresponding segments of the first set; andlabeling a second set of the identified speech segments using the learned correlation, to indicate the participants who spoke during the speech segments in the second set.
  • 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein processing the audio stream comprises applying a voice activity detector to identify as the speech segments parts of the audio stream in which a power of the audio signal exceeds a specified threshold.
  • 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein labeling the identified speech segments comprises measuring and compensating for a delay in transmission of the audio stream over the network relative to timestamps associated with the conference metadata.
  • 4. The method according to claim 1, wherein labeling the second set comprises labeling one or more of the speech segments for which the conference metadata did not provide a speaker identification.
  • 5. The method according to claim 1, wherein labeling the second set comprises correcting one or more of the speaker identifications of the speech segments in the first set.
  • 6. The method according to claim 1, wherein learning the correlation comprises building a respective statistical model of the speech of each participant based on the audio stream in the first set of the speech segments that were labeled as belonging to the participant, and wherein labeling the second set comprises comparing the statistical model to each of a sequence of time frames in the audio stream.
  • 7. The method according to claim 6, further comprising building an updated statistical model using the labeling of the second set of the identified speech segments and updating the labeling of the second set of the identified speech segments using the updated statistical model.
  • 8. The method according to claim 6, further comprising repeating the building of an updated statistical model and the updating of the labeling of the second set of the identified speech segments until a target overall confidence level of the labelling is reached.
  • 9. The method according to claim 1, wherein learning the correlation comprises estimating transition probabilities between the speaker identifications based on the labeled speech segments in the first set, and wherein labeling the second set comprises applying the transition probabilities in labeling the second set of the speech segments.
  • 10. The method according to claim 9, wherein applying the transition probabilities comprises applying a dynamic programming algorithm over a series of time frames in the audio stream in order to identify a likeliest sequence of the participants to have spoken over the series of time frames.
  • 11. The method according to claim 1, wherein diarizing the teleconference comprises extracting the acoustic features from the speech segments in the second set, and applying the extracted acoustic features in further refining a segmentation of the audio stream.
  • 12. The method according to claim 1, and comprising analyzing speech patterns in the teleconference using the labeled speech segments.
  • 13. The method according to claim 12, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises measuring relative durations of speech by the participants.
  • 14. The method according to claim 12, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises measuring a level of interactivity between the participants.
  • 15. The method according to claim 12, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises correlating the speech patterns of a group of salespeople over multiple teleconferences with respective sales made by the salespeople in order to identify an optimal speech pattern.
  • 16. The method according to claim 1, wherein learning the correlation comprises training a neural network to predict the labelled speaker identifications of the segments in the first set, using the acoustic features extracted from the speech segments in the first set as inputs.
  • 17. The method according to claim 1, wherein labeling the second set of the identified speech segments comprises applying a dynamic programming algorithm.
  • 18. Apparatus for audio processing, comprising: a memory, which is configured to store a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference; anda processor, which is configured to process the audio stream so as to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream, to parse the conference metadata so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference, and to diarize the teleconference based on both acoustic features from the audio stream and the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, in a process comprising: labeling a first set of the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, wherein each speech segment from the audio stream, in the first set, is labelled with a speaker identification of a period corresponding to a time of the segment;extracting acoustic features from the speech segments in the first set;learning a correlation between the speaker identifications labelled to the segments in the first set, and the extracted acoustic features extracted from the corresponding segments of the first set; andlabeling a second set of the identified speech segments using the learned correlation, to indicate the participants who spoke during the speech segments in the second set.
  • 19. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the processor is configured to apply a voice activity detector to identify as the speech segments parts of the audio stream in which a power of the audio signal exceeds a specified threshold.
  • 20. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the processor is configured to measure and compensate for a delay in transmission of the audio stream over the network relative to timestamps associated with the conference metadata in labeling the identified speech segments.
  • 21. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein labeling the second set comprises labeling one or more of the speech segments for which the conference metadata did not provide a speaker identification.
  • 22. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein labeling the second set comprises correcting one or more of the speaker identifications of the speech segments in the first set.
  • 23. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein learning the correlation comprises building a respective statistical model of the speech of each participant based on the audio stream in the first set of the speech segments that were labeled as belonging to the participant, and wherein labeling the second set comprises comparing the statistical model to each of a sequence of time frames in the audio stream.
  • 24. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein learning the correlation comprises estimating transition probabilities between the speaker identifications based on the labeled speech segments in the first set, and wherein labeling the second set comprises applying the transition probabilities in labeling the second set of the speech segments.
  • 25. The apparatus according to claim 24, wherein applying the transition probabilities comprises applying a dynamic programming algorithm over a series of time frames in the audio stream in order to identify a likeliest sequence of the participants to have spoken over the series of time frames.
  • 26. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein diarizing the teleconference comprises extracting the acoustic features from the speech segments in the second set, and applying the extracted acoustic features in further refining a segmentation of the audio stream.
  • 27. The apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the processor is configured to analyze speech patterns in the teleconference using the labeled speech segments.
  • 28. The apparatus according to claim 27, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises measuring relative durations of speech by the participants.
  • 29. The apparatus according to claim 27, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises measuring a level of interactivity between the participants.
  • 30. The apparatus according to claim 27, wherein analyzing the speech patterns comprises correlating the speech patterns of a group of salespeople over multiple teleconferences with respective sales made by the salespeople in order to identify an optimal speech pattern.
  • 31. A computer software product, comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium in which program instructions are stored, which instructions, when read by a computer, cause the computer to store a recording of a teleconference among multiple participants over a network including an audio stream containing speech uttered by the participants and conference metadata for controlling a display on video screens viewed by the participants during the teleconference, and to process the audio stream so as to identify speech segments, in which one or more of the participants were speaking, interspersed with intervals of silence in the audio stream, to parse the conference metadata so as to extract speaker identifications, which are indicative of the participants who spoke during successive periods of the teleconference, and to diarize the teleconference based on both acoustic features from the audio stream and the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, in a process comprising: labeling a first set of the identified speech segments from the audio stream with the speaker identifications extracted from the metadata accompanying the audio stream, wherein each speech segment from the audio stream, in the first set, is labelled with a speaker identification of a period corresponding to a time of the segment;extracting acoustic features from the speech segments in the first set;learning a correlation between the speaker identifications labelled to the segments in the first set, and the extracted acoustic features extracted from the corresponding segments of the first set; andlabeling a second set of the identified speech segments using the learned correlation, to indicate the participants who spoke during the speech segments in the second set.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/658,604, filed Apr. 17, 2018, which is incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (212)
Number Name Date Kind
6185527 Petkovic et al. Feb 2001 B1
6324282 McIllwaine et al. Nov 2001 B1
6363145 Shaffer et al. Mar 2002 B1
6434520 Kanevsky et al. Aug 2002 B1
6542602 Elazar Apr 2003 B1
6603854 Judkins et al. Aug 2003 B1
6721704 Strubbe et al. Apr 2004 B1
6724887 Eilbacher et al. Apr 2004 B1
6741697 Benson et al. May 2004 B2
6775377 McIllwaine et al. Aug 2004 B2
6914975 Koehler et al. Jul 2005 B2
6922466 Peterson et al. Jul 2005 B1
6959080 Dezonno et al. Oct 2005 B2
6970821 Shambaugh et al. Nov 2005 B1
7010106 Gritzer et al. Mar 2006 B2
7076427 Scarano et al. Jul 2006 B2
7151826 Shambaugh et al. Dec 2006 B2
7203285 Blair Apr 2007 B2
7281022 Gruhl et al. Oct 2007 B2
7305082 Elazar Dec 2007 B2
7373608 Lentz May 2008 B2
7457404 Hession et al. Nov 2008 B1
7460659 Shambaugh et al. Dec 2008 B2
7474633 Halbraich et al. Jan 2009 B2
RE40634 Blair et al. Feb 2009 E
7548539 Kouretas et al. Jun 2009 B2
7570755 Williams et al. Aug 2009 B2
7577246 Idan et al. Aug 2009 B2
7596498 Basu et al. Sep 2009 B2
7599475 Eilam et al. Oct 2009 B2
7613290 Williams et al. Nov 2009 B2
7631046 Litvin et al. Dec 2009 B2
7660297 Fisher et al. Feb 2010 B2
7664641 Pettay et al. Feb 2010 B1
7702532 Vigil Apr 2010 B2
7716048 Pereg et al. May 2010 B2
7728870 Rudnik et al. Jun 2010 B2
7739115 Pettay et al. Jun 2010 B1
RE41608 Blair et al. Aug 2010 E
7769622 Reid et al. Aug 2010 B2
7770221 Frenkel et al. Aug 2010 B2
7783513 Lee Aug 2010 B2
7817795 Gupta et al. Oct 2010 B2
7852994 Blair et al. Dec 2010 B1
7853006 Fama et al. Dec 2010 B1
7869586 Conway et al. Jan 2011 B2
7873035 Kouretas et al. Jan 2011 B2
7881216 Blair Feb 2011 B2
7881471 Spohrer et al. Feb 2011 B2
7882212 Nappier et al. Feb 2011 B1
7899176 Calahan et al. Mar 2011 B1
7899178 Williams, II et al. Mar 2011 B2
7904481 Deka et al. Mar 2011 B1
7925889 Blair Mar 2011 B2
7949552 Korenblit et al. May 2011 B2
7953219 Freedman et al. May 2011 B2
7953621 Fama et al. May 2011 B2
7965828 Calahan et al. Jun 2011 B2
7966187 Pettay et al. Jun 2011 B1
7966265 Schalk et al. Jun 2011 B2
7991613 Blair Aug 2011 B2
7995717 Conway et al. Aug 2011 B2
8000465 Williams et al. Aug 2011 B2
8005675 Wasserblat et al. Aug 2011 B2
8050921 Mark et al. Nov 2011 B2
8055503 Scarano et al. Nov 2011 B2
8078463 Wasserblat et al. Dec 2011 B2
8086462 Alonso et al. Dec 2011 B1
8094587 Halbraich et al. Jan 2012 B2
8094803 Danson et al. Jan 2012 B2
8107613 Gumbula Jan 2012 B2
8108237 Bourne et al. Jan 2012 B2
8112298 Bourne et al. Feb 2012 B2
RE43255 Blair et al. Mar 2012 E
RE43324 Blair et al. Apr 2012 E
8150021 Geva et al. Apr 2012 B2
8160233 Keren et al. Apr 2012 B2
8165114 Halbraich et al. Apr 2012 B2
8180643 Pettay et al. May 2012 B1
8189763 Blair May 2012 B2
8194848 Zernik et al. Jun 2012 B2
8199886 Calahan et al. Jun 2012 B2
8199896 Portman et al. Jun 2012 B2
8204056 Dong et al. Jun 2012 B2
8204884 Freedman et al. Jun 2012 B2
8214242 Agapi et al. Jul 2012 B2
8219401 Pettay et al. Jul 2012 B1
8243888 Cho Aug 2012 B2
8255542 Henson Aug 2012 B2
8275843 Anantharaman et al. Sep 2012 B2
8285833 Blair Oct 2012 B2
8290804 Gong Oct 2012 B2
8306814 Dobry et al. Nov 2012 B2
8326631 Watson Dec 2012 B1
8340968 Gershman Dec 2012 B1
8345828 Williams et al. Jan 2013 B2
8396732 Nies et al. Mar 2013 B1
8411841 Edwards et al. Apr 2013 B2
8442033 Williams et al. May 2013 B2
8467518 Blair Jun 2013 B2
8526597 Geva et al. Sep 2013 B2
8543393 Barnish Sep 2013 B2
8611523 Conway et al. Dec 2013 B2
8649499 Koster et al. Feb 2014 B1
8670552 Keren et al. Mar 2014 B2
8675824 Barnes et al. Mar 2014 B1
8706498 George Apr 2014 B2
8761376 Pande et al. Apr 2014 B2
8718266 Williams et al. May 2014 B1
8719016 Ziv et al. May 2014 B1
8724778 Barnes et al. May 2014 B1
8725518 Waserblat et al. May 2014 B2
8738374 Jaroker May 2014 B2
8787552 Zhao et al. Jul 2014 B1
8798254 Naparstek et al. Aug 2014 B2
8806455 Katz Aug 2014 B1
8861708 Kopparapu et al. Oct 2014 B2
8903078 Blair Dec 2014 B2
8909590 Newnham et al. Dec 2014 B2
8971517 Keren et al. Mar 2015 B2
8990238 Goldfarb Mar 2015 B2
9020920 Haggerty et al. Apr 2015 B1
9025736 Meng et al. May 2015 B2
9053750 Gibbon et al. Jun 2015 B2
9083799 Loftus et al. Jul 2015 B2
9092733 Sneyders et al. Jul 2015 B2
9135630 Goldfarb et al. Sep 2015 B2
9148511 Ye et al. Sep 2015 B2
9160853 Daddi et al. Oct 2015 B1
9160854 Daddi et al. Oct 2015 B1
9167093 Geffen et al. Oct 2015 B2
9197744 Sittin et al. Nov 2015 B2
9213978 Melamed et al. Dec 2015 B2
9214001 Rawle Dec 2015 B2
9232063 Romano et al. Jan 2016 B2
9232064 Skiba et al. Jan 2016 B1
9253316 Williams et al. Feb 2016 B1
9262175 Lynch et al. Feb 2016 B2
9269073 Sammon et al. Feb 2016 B2
9270826 Conway et al. Feb 2016 B2
9300790 Gainsboro et al. Mar 2016 B2
9311914 Wasserbat et al. Apr 2016 B2
9368116 Ziv et al. Jun 2016 B2
9401145 Ziv et al. Jul 2016 B1
9401990 Teitelman et al. Jul 2016 B2
9407768 Conway et al. Aug 2016 B2
9412362 Iannone et al. Aug 2016 B2
9418152 Nissan et al. Aug 2016 B2
9420227 Shires et al. Aug 2016 B1
9432511 Conway et al. Aug 2016 B2
9460394 Krueger et al. Oct 2016 B2
9460722 Sidi et al. Oct 2016 B2
9497167 Weintraub et al. Nov 2016 B2
9503579 Watson et al. Nov 2016 B2
9508346 Achituv et al. Nov 2016 B2
9589073 Yishay Mar 2017 B2
9596349 Hernandez Mar 2017 B1
9633650 Achituv et al. Apr 2017 B2
9639520 Yishay May 2017 B2
9690873 Yishay Jun 2017 B2
9699409 Reshef Jul 2017 B1
9785701 Yishay Oct 2017 B2
9936066 Mammen et al. Apr 2018 B1
9947320 Lembersky et al. Apr 2018 B2
9953048 Weisman et al. Apr 2018 B2
9953650 Falevsky Apr 2018 B1
9977830 Romano et al. May 2018 B2
10079937 Nowak et al. Sep 2018 B2
10134400 Ziv et al. Nov 2018 B2
10503719 Rice et al. Dec 2019 B1
10503783 Muniz Navarro et al. Dec 2019 B1
10504050 Rogynskyy et al. Dec 2019 B1
10521443 Brunets et al. Dec 2019 B2
10528601 Rogynskyy et al. Jan 2020 B2
10565229 Rogynskyy et al. Feb 2020 B2
10599653 Rogynskyy et al. Mar 2020 B2
10649999 Rogynskyy et al. May 2020 B2
10657129 Rogynskyy et al. May 2020 B2
20040021765 Kubala Feb 2004 A1
20040024598 Srivastava et al. Feb 2004 A1
20070129942 Ban et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070260564 Peters et al. Nov 2007 A1
20080300872 Basu et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090306981 Cromack et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100104086 Park Apr 2010 A1
20100211385 Sehlstedt Aug 2010 A1
20100246799 Lubowich et al. Sep 2010 A1
20110103572 Blair May 2011 A1
20110217021 Dubin Sep 2011 A1
20130081056 Hu et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130300939 Chou et al. Nov 2013 A1
20140214402 Diao et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140220526 Sylves Aug 2014 A1
20140229471 Galvin, Jr. et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140278377 Peters et al. Sep 2014 A1
20150025887 Sidi Jan 2015 A1
20150066935 Peters et al. Mar 2015 A1
20160014373 LaFata Jan 2016 A1
20160071520 Hayakawa Mar 2016 A1
20160110343 Kumar Rangarajan Sridhar Apr 2016 A1
20160275952 Kashtan et al. Sep 2016 A1
20160314191 Markman et al. Oct 2016 A1
20170270930 Ozmeral Sep 2017 A1
20170323643 Arslan Nov 2017 A1
20180181561 Raanani Jun 2018 A1
20180239822 Reshef et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180254051 Church Sep 2018 A1
20180307675 Akkiraju et al. Oct 2018 A1
20180342250 Cohen et al. Nov 2018 A1
20190155947 Chu et al. May 2019 A1
20190304470 Ghaemmaghami Oct 2019 A1
20200177403 Vazquez-Rivera Jun 2020 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (3)
Number Date Country
108920644 Nov 2018 CN
2005071666 Aug 2005 WO
2012151716 Nov 2012 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (22)
Entry
Makhoul et al. “Speech and Language Technologies for Audio Indexing and Retrieval”. Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 88, No. 8, Aug. 2000, pp. 1338-1353 (Year: 2000).
Anguera., “Speaker Independent Discriminant Feature Extraction for Acoustic Pattern-Matching”, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 1-4, Mar. 25-30, 2012.
Church et al., “Speaker Diarization: A Perspective on Challenges and Opportunities From Theory to Practice”, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 4950-4954, Mar. 5-9, 2017.
Hieu., “Speaker Diarization in Meetings Domain”, A thesis submitted to the School of Computer Engineering of the Nanyang Technological University, pp. 1-149, Jan. 2015.
Shum et al., “Unsupervised Methods for Speaker Diarization: An Integrated and Iterative Approach”, IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 21, No. 10, pp. 2015-2028, Oct. 2013.
Serrano, “Speaker Diarization and Tracking in Multiple-Sensor Environments”, Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Universitat Polit{grave over ( )}ecnica de Catalunya, Spain, pp. 1-323, Oct. 2012.
Friedland et al., “Multi-modal speaker diarization of real-world meetings using compressed-domain video features”, International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP'09), pp. 1-4, Apr. 19-24, 2009.
Anguera., “Speaker Diarization: A Review of Recent Research”, First draft submitted to IEEE TASLP, pp. 1-15, Aug. 19, 2010.
Balwani et al., “Speaker Diarization: A Review and Analysis”, International Journal of Integrated Computer Applications & Research (IJICAR), vol. 1, issue 3, pp. 1-5, year 2015.
Evans et al., “Comparative Study of Bottom-Up and Top-Down Approaches to Speaker Diarization”, IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 382-392, Feb. 2012.
Sasikala et al., “A Survey on Speaker Diarization Approach for Audio and Video Content Retrieval”, International Journal of Research and Computational Technology, vol. 5, issue 4, p. 1-8, Dec. 2013.
Moattar et al., “A review on speaker diarization systems and approaches”, Speech Communication, vol. 54, No. 10, pp. 1065-1103, year 2012.
Wang et al., “Speaker Diarization with LSTM, Electrical Engineering and Systems Science”, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Calgary, Canada, pp. 5239-5243, Apr. 15-20, 2018.
Eisenstein et al., “Bayesian Unsupervised Topic Segmentation”, Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 334-343, Oct. 2008.
Sherman et al., “Using Hidden Markov Models for Topic Segmentation of Meeting Transcripts”, Proceedings of the IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop 2008, pp. 185-188, year 2008.
Purver et al., “Unsupervised Topic Modelling for Multi-Party Spoken Discourse”, Proceedings of the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 17-24, Jul. 2006.
EP Application # 17896398.9 Search Report dated Oct. 27, 2020.
EP Application # 20184576.5 Search Report dated Dec. 21, 2020.
Shafiei et al., “A Statistical Model for Topic Segmentation and Clustering,” 21st Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence, Canadian AI 2008: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 283-295, year 2008.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/520,374 Office Action dated Jun. 10, 2021.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/520,374 Office Action dated Dec. 7, 2021.
EP Application # 17896398.9 Office Action dated Dec. 20, 2021.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20190318743 A1 Oct 2019 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
62658604 Apr 2018 US