1 / 36

Centrum

T. T. Centrum. för talteknologi. Multi-modal expression of Swedish prominence Björn Granström Centre for Speech Technology, Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden. Historical background. Prosody for speech synthesis at KTH, together with Rolf Carlson

kingtimothy
Download Presentation

Centrum

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. T T Centrum för talteknologi Multi-modal expression of Swedish prominenceBjörn Granström Centre for Speech Technology, Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden

  2. Historical background • Prosody for speech synthesis at KTH, together with Rolf Carlson • The Lund intonation model – Gösta Bruce et al.

  3. Several joint projects Profs – Prosodic phrasing in Swedish ~1989-1992 Gösta Bruce, Björn Granström and more First reference: G. Bruce and B. Granström. Modelling Swedish intonation in a text-to-speech system. STL-QPSR, 30(1):17-21, 1989. (on the KTH web)

  4. Potentially ambiguous sentences, varying in phrase boundary location

  5. Entering greve Piper´s humble residence

  6. Several joint projects, cont. Prosodiag - Prosodic Segmentation and Structuring of Dialogue (HSFR + NUTEK) 1993 –1996 Gösta Bruce, Björn Granström, Kjell Gustafson, David House, Paul Touati Project Description The object of study is the prosody of dialogue in a language technology framework. The primary goal of the project is to increase our understanding of how prosodic aspects of speech are exploited interactively in dialogue and on the basis of this increased knowledge to be able to create a more powerful prosody model. Late reference: Gösta Bruce, Johan Frid, Björn Granström, Kjell Gustafson, Merle Home, and David House. Prosodic segmentation and structuring of dialogue. TMH-QPSR, 37(3):1-6, 1996. More than 20 joint publications – and then?

  7. Much in the context of the annual phonetics meetings – next:

  8. Project meetings in inspirering surroundings

  9. ..probing many different cultures

  10. Is prosody more than sound? • Our bias: communication is multi-modal • Traditionally prosodic functions are signaled by “gestures”, perceived by “eye and ear” • This concerns both body and face gestures • Preliminary hypothesis: F0~eyebrow height - e.g. Cavé et al. (1996) • Easy to put to a test with multimodal speech synthesis

  11. Eyebrow vs intonation 1 No eyebrow motion 2 Eyebrow motion controlled by the fundamental frequency of the voice 3 Eyebrow motion at focal accents + 4 Eyebrow motion at the first focal accent + “Jag heter Axel, inte Axell” (translation: “My name is Axel, not Axell”). In Sweden Axel is a first name as opposed to Axell, which is a family name.

  12. Goals and research context • How are visual expressions used to convey and strengthen prosodic functions? • Understand interactions between visual expressions, dialog functions and speech acoustics • Context: animated talking agent • Realistic communicative behavior using multimodal speech synthesis

  13. Prominence stress focus Phrasing Utterance type question statement Dialogue functions back channeling turntaking Attitudes Emotions Visual prosodic functions

  14. Visual prosody cont. • What is underlying? • How tight is the AV connection? • What are the important visual gestures? • More optional than acoustic prosodic parameters? • Individual and cultural variation • Reinforcing or qualifying acoustics?

  15. Formal experimentProminence due to eyebrow rise5 content words: ”När pappafiskar stör piper Putte”When dad is fishing sturgeon, Putte is whimpering

  16. Example of stimuliTask: “which word is most prominent” (identical acoustics – varied location of eyebrow movement) Eyebrow movement No eyebrow movement (neutral)

  17. Prominence increase due to eyebrow movement

  18. Feedback experiment • Mini dialogues (two turns) • Travel agent application • Both visual and acoustic feedback cues • Affirmative cues – agent understands/accepts the request • Negative cues – agent is unsure about the request (seeks confirmation) • Six cues hypothesised Granström, House & Swerts (2002)

  19. Pos/Neg feedback experiment (Granström, House & Swerts 2002)

  20. Recording of communicative interactions Automatic tracking of reflective spots in 3D (Qualisys)

  21. Interactions: emotion and articulation (resynthesis)(from AV speech database – EU/PF_STAR project)

  22. Measurement points for lip coarticulation analysis Vertical distance left mouth corner Lateral distance

  23. The expressive mouth ”left mouth corner” • All vowels (sentences) • Encouraging • Happy • Angry • Sad • Neutral (Svanfeldt et al. 2003)

  24. Prompted read speech database • Expressive modes: • Confirming, questioning, certain, uncertain, happy, (angry) • 39 short, content neutral sentences with three possible focal accent positions each, e.g. • Båten seglade förbi (The boat sailed by) • Dom flyttade möblerna (They moved the furniture) • Nonsense words (VCV, VCCV, CVC) • Digits

  25. Mean eyebrow positions for one speaker

  26. Nose marker traces with automatic (blue) and two human (red) annotated head nods (adapted from Cerrato & Svanfeldt 2006)

  27. Examples from the database Focal accent on: Båten seglade förbi Confirming Happy

  28. Exploitation of visual parameters • Visual cues exploited at focal accent • Mouth cues • Happy, encouraging • Eyebrow cues • Happy, questioning • Vertical head nods • Confirming

  29. Analysis in terms of FAP and FMQ MPEG-4 Facial Animation Parameter (FAP) A subset of 31 FAPs out of the 68 FAPs defined in the MPEG-4 standard, including only the ones that we were able to calculate directly from our measured point data Focal Motion Quotient, FMQ, defined as the standard deviation of a FAP parameter taken over a word in focal position, divided by the average standard deviation of the same FAP in the same word in non-focal position.

  30. The focal motion quotient, FMQ, averaged across all sentences, for all measured MPEG-4 FAPs for several expressive modes articulation I smile I brows I head

  31. The effect of focus on the variation of several groups of MPG-4 /FAP parameters, for different expressive modes FMQ (Focal Motion Quotient)

  32. The effect of focal accent on selected parameter variations in Certain and Uncertain readings FMQ (Focal Motion Quotient)

  33. What´s next? • Better recordings • Detailed analysis of the eye region: ”Gaze and wrinkles” • Use in applications, e.g. spoken dialogue systems • And more audible prosody…….

  34. New cooperative project SIMULEKT - Simulering av svenskans prosodiska dialekttyper (Simulating intonational varieties of Swedish) VR 2007-2009 And finally………..

  35. Congratulations! Well done Gösta!

More Related