Research PaperNo Access

Real-time Performance Evaluation of Modified Cascaded Median-based Noise Estimation for Speech Enhancement System

Bittu Kumar

Department of Electronics Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad 826004, Jharkhand, India

E-mail Address: kumarbittu135@gmail.com

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219477519500202Cited by:23 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

In this paper, the performance evaluation of Modified Cascaded Median (MCM)-based noise estimation method for speech enhancement system has been carried out. The MCM-based method, though reported earlier, was not extensively evaluated; particularly, its real-time performance had not been considered. In the present study, the performance of the MCM-based noise estimation method has been compared with those based on Dynamic Quantile Tracking (DQT) and Cascaded Median (CM), through simulation as well as real-time implementation using TMS320C6416T DSK. All comparisons were made for speech quality (subjectively — mean opinion score and objectively — PESQ score, log-likelihood ratio, weighted spectral slope distance, segmented signal-to-noise ratio and composite measures for signal distortion $C_{SIG}$ $C_{SIG}$ , background intrusiveness $C_{BAK}$ $C_{BAK}$ and overall distortion $C_{OVL}$ $C_{OVL}$ ) at the 95% level of confidence. The real-time parameters such as memory consumption and execution time have been used for real-time implementation and compared for the three methods. The results, for different SNR-based degraded speech signals, show that the modified cascaded median-based noise estimation is the best in terms of PESQ score, $C_{SIG}$ $C_{SIG}$ , $C_{BAK}$ $C_{BAK}$ , $C_{OVL}$ $C_{OVL}$ and mean opinion score. On the other hand, for different noise corrupted-based speech signals, it performs well as compared to the original CM. Memory consumption and average execution time for the MCM-based noise estimation lie in-between those for DQT and CM-based methods.

Communicated by Zoltan Gingl

Keywords:

References

1. M. Parchami, W. Zhu, B. Champagne and E. Plourde, Recent developments in speech enhancement in the short-time Fourier transform domain, IEEE Circuits Syst. Mag. 16(3) (2016) 45–77. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. S. Kumar, B. Kumar and N. Kumar, Speech enhancement techniques: A review, Rungta Int. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 1(1) (2016) 183–185. Google Scholar
3. G. Sharon, E. Vincent, S. M. Golan and A. Ozerov, A consolidated perspective on multi microphone speech enhancement and source separation, IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 25(4) (2017) 692–730. Crossref, Google Scholar
4. P. C. Loizou, Speech Enhancement: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn. (CRC Press Taylor and Francis, 2013). Crossref, Google Scholar
5. Y. Wang and M. Brookes, Model-based speech enhancement in the modulation domain, IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 26(3) (2018) 580–594. Crossref, Google Scholar
6. B. Kumar, Mean-median based noise estimation method using spectral subtraction for speech enhancement technique, Indian J. Sci. Technol. 9(35) (2016). Crossref, Google Scholar
7. K. Paliwal, K. Wójcicki and B. Schwerin, Single-channel speech enhancement using spectral subtraction in the short-time modulation domain, Speech Commun. 52(5) (2010) 450–475. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. R. M. Udrea, N. D. Vizireanu and S. Ciochina, An improved spectral subtraction method for speech enhancement using a perceptual weighting filter, Digit. Signal Process. 18(4) (2008) 581–587. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. G. Harald, S. E. Nordholm and I. Claesson, Spectral subtraction using reduced delay convolution and adaptive averaging, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 9(8) (2001) 799–807. Crossref, Google Scholar
10. F. Albu, N. Dumitriu and L. D. Stanciu, Speech enhancement by spectral subtraction, Proc. Int. Symp. Electronics and Telecommunications (Timisoara, Romania, 1996), pp. 78–83. Google Scholar
11. Z. Wenlu and P. Hua, Modified Wiener filtering speech enhancement algorithm with phase spectrum compensation, 9th Int. Conf. Communication Software and Networks (ICCSN), Guangzhou, China, 6–8 May (IEEE, 2017), pp. 1075–1079. Crossref, Google Scholar
12. B. Kumar, Comparative performance evaluation of MMSE-based speech enhancement techniques through simulation and real-time implementation, Int. J. Speech Technol. 21(4) (2018) 1033–1044. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. K. Hermus and P. Wambacq, A review of signal subspace speech enhancement and its application to noise robust speech recognition, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process. 2007(1) (2006) 045821. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. F. Beritelli, S. Casale and A. Cavallaero, A robust voice activity detector for wireless communications using soft computing, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 16(9) (1998) 1818–1829. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. K. H. Woo, T. Y. Yang, K. J. Park and C. Lee, Robust voice activity detection algorithm for estimating noise spectrum, Electron. Lett. 36(2) (2000) 180–181. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. C. Ris and S. Dupont, Assessing local noise level estimation methods: Application to noise robust ASR, Speech Commun. 34(1–2) (2001) 141–158. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. H. G. Hirsch and C. Ehrlicher, Noise estimation techniques for robust speech recognition, Int. Conf. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Detroit, MI, USA, 9–12 May (IEEE, 1995), pp. 153–156. Crossref, Google Scholar
18. R. Martin, Spectral subtraction based on minimum statistics, 7th European Signal Processing Conf. (7th EUSIPCO), Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 13–16 September 1994, pp. 1182–1185. Google Scholar
19. V. Stahl, A. Fisher and R. Bipus, Quantile based noise estimation for spectral subtraction and Wiener filtering, Int. Conf. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Istanbul, Turkey, 5–9 June (IEEE, 2000), pp. 1875–1878. Crossref, Google Scholar
20. S. K. Waddi, P. C. Pandey and N. Tiwari, Speech enhancement using spectral subtraction and cascaded-median based noise estimation for hearing impaired listeners, Twentieth National Conf. Communications (NCC), IIT Delhi, India, 15–17 February (IEEE, 2013), pp. 1–5. Crossref, Google Scholar
21. T. Nitya and P. C. Pandey, Speech enhancement using noise estimation based on dynamic quantile tracking for hearing impaired listeners, Twenty First National Conf. Communications (NCC), IIT Mumbai, India, 27 Feb–1 March (IEEE, 2015), pp. 1–6. Google Scholar
22. B. Kumar, Spectral subtraction using modified cascaded median based noise estimation for speech enhancement, Sixth Int. Conf. Computer and Communication Technology (ICCCT), MNNIT Allahabad, India, 25–27 September (ACM, 2015), pp. 214–218. Crossref, Google Scholar
23. TMS320C6416T DSK technical reference, Technical Report 508035-0001 Rev. A, November 2004. Google Scholar
24. Instruments, Texas, TMS320C6000 Code Composer Studio Getting Started Guide (2003). Google Scholar
25. Speech Enhancement Assessment Resource (SpEAR) Database, http://ee.ogi.edu/NSEL/. Beta Release v1.0. CSLU, Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology. E. Wan, A. Nelson and R. Peterson. Google Scholar
26. A. W. Rix et al., Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ), an objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrow band telephone networks and speech codecs, ITU-T Recommendation (2001), p. 862. Google Scholar
27. Y. Hu and P. C. Loizou, Evaluation of objective measures for speech enhancement, 9th Int. Conf. Spoken Language Processing (Interspeech 2006-ICSLP), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 17–22 September (ISCA, 2006), pp. 1447–1450. Crossref, Google Scholar
28. I. T. U. T. Rec, P. 800.1, Mean opinion score (MOS) terminology, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva (2006). Google Scholar