Comparing the performance of forced aligners used in sociophonetic research
dc.contributor.author | Gonzalez Ochoa, Simon | |
dc.contributor.author | Grama, James | |
dc.contributor.author | Travis, Catherine | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-16T22:37:53Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-06-16T22:37:53Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.updated | 2022-10-09T07:16:35Z | |
dc.description.abstract | Forced aligners have revolutionized sociophonetics, but while there are several forced aligners available, there are few systematic comparisons of their performance. Here, we consider four major forced aligners used in sociophonetics today: MAUS, FAVE, LaBB-CAT and MFA. Through comparisons with human coders, we find that both aligner and phonological context affect the quality of automated alignments of vowels extracted from English sociolinguistic interview data. MFA and LaBB-CAT produce the highest quality alignments, in some cases not significantly different from human alignment, followed by FAVE, and then MAUS. Aligners are less accurate placing boundaries following a vowel than preceding it, and they vary in accuracy across manner of articulation, particularly for following boundaries. These observations allow us to make specific recommendations for manual correction of forced alignment. | |
dc.description.sponsorship | We gratefully acknowledge support from the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language, and funding from a Transdisciplinary & Innovation Grant (TIG952018). We thank Robert Fromont, Debbie Loakes, and the anonymous Linguistics Vanguard reviewers for valuable feedback on the paper, as well as Miriam Meyerhoff, Jim Stanford, and Hywel Stoakes for help in formulating the ideas presented here. | en_AU |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en_AU |
dc.identifier.issn | 2199-174X | en_AU |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1885/267328 | |
dc.language.iso | en_AU | en_AU |
dc.provenance | https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/id/publication/31210/..."Author can archive publisher's version/PDF" From SHERPA/RoMEO site as at 17/06/2022 | en_AU |
dc.publisher | De Gruyter Mouton | |
dc.relation | http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/CE140100041 | |
dc.rights | © 2020 The authors | |
dc.source | Linguistics Vanguard | |
dc.subject | forced alignment | |
dc.subject | accuracy comparison | |
dc.subject | sociophonetics | |
dc.subject | vowels | |
dc.subject | workflow optimization | |
dc.title | Comparing the performance of forced aligners used in sociophonetic research | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
dcterms.accessRights | Open Access | en_AU |
local.bibliographicCitation.issue | 1 | en_AU |
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage | 13 | |
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage | 1 | |
local.contributor.affiliation | Gonzalez Ochoa, Simon, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU | en_AU |
local.contributor.affiliation | Grama, James, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU | en_AU |
local.contributor.affiliation | Travis, Catherine, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU | en_AU |
local.contributor.authoremail | repository.admin@anu.edu.au | en_AU |
local.contributor.authoruid | Gonzalez Ochoa, Simon, u1037706 | en_AU |
local.contributor.authoruid | Grama, James, u1038619 | en_AU |
local.contributor.authoruid | Travis, Catherine, u3487939 | en_AU |
local.description.notes | Imported from ARIES | en_AU |
local.identifier.absfor | 200404 - Laboratory Phonetics and Speech Science | en_AU |
local.identifier.ariespublication | a383154xPUB14308 | en_AU |
local.identifier.citationvolume | 6 | en_AU |
local.identifier.doi | 10.1515/lingvan-2019-0058 | en_AU |
local.identifier.thomsonID | WOS:000587353600001 | |
local.identifier.uidSubmittedBy | a383154 | en_AU |
local.publisher.url | https://www.degruyter.com/ | en_AU |
local.type.status | Published Version | en_AU |
Downloads
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- 01_Gonzalez+Ochoa_Comparing_the_performance_of_2020.pdf
- Size:
- 2.09 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format