Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis Heiga Zen Google August 31st, 2013

Outline

Background Deep Learning Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis Motivation Deep learning-based approaches DNN-based statistical parametric speech synthesis Experiments Conclusion

Text-to-speech as sequence-to-sequence mapping

• Automatic speech recognition (ASR) Speech (continuous time series) → Text (discrete symbol sequence) • Machine translation (MT) Text (discrete symbol sequence) → Text (discrete symbol sequence) • Text-to-speech synthesis (TTS) Text (discrete symbol sequence) → Speech (continuous time series)

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

1 of 50

Speech production process

modulation of carrier wave by speech information

freq transfer char

voiced/unvoiced

fundamental freq

text (concept)

speech

frequency transfer characteristics magnitude start--end

Sound source voiced: pulse unvoiced: noise

fundamental frequency

air flow

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

2 of 50

Typical flow of TTS system

TEXT Sentence segmentaiton Word segmentation Text normalization Part-of-speech tagging Pronunciation

discrete ⇒ discrete NLP Frontend

Text analysis Speech synthesis

Prosody prediction Waveform generation

SYNTHESIZED discrete ⇒ continuous Speech SPEECH Backend

This talk focuses on backend Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

3 of 50

Statistical parametric speech synthesis (SPSS) [2]

Speech

Feature extraction

Model training

Parameter generation

Text

Text

Waveform synthesis

Synthesized Speech

• Large data + automatic training → Automatic voice building

• Parametric representation of speech → Flexible to change its voice characteristics Hidden Markov model (HMM) as its acoustic model → HMM-based speech synthesis system (HTS) [1]

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

4 of 50

Characteristics of SPSS • Advantages − Flexibility to change voice characteristics − Small footprint − Robustness • Drawback − Quality • Major factors for quality degradation [2] − Vocoder − Acoustic model → Deep learning − Oversmoothing Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

5 of 50

Deep learning [3] • Machine learning methodology using multiple-layered models

• Motivated by brains, which organize ideas and concepts hierarchically • Typically artificial neural network (NN) w/ 3 or more levels of non-linear operations

Shallow Neural Network

Heiga Zen

Deep Neural Network (DNN)

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

6 of 50

Basic components in NN Non-linear unit

Network of units

hj hi = f (z i )

... xi ...

zj =

X

j

xi wij

i

i

Examples of activation functions 1 1 + e−zj Hyperbolic tangent: f (zj ) = tanh (zj ) Logistic sigmoid: f (zj ) =

Rectified linear: f (zj ) = max (zj , 0) Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

7 of 50

Deep architecture • Logistic regression → depth=1 • Kernel machines, decision trees → depth=2 • Ensemble learning (e.g., Boosting [4], tree intersection [5]) → depth++ • N -layer neural network → depth=N + 1

... ... ... ...

Output units Output vector y

Input vector x

Input units

Hidden units Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

8 of 50

Difficulties to train DNN

• NN w/ many layers used to give worse performance than NN w/ few layers − Slow to train − Vanishing gradients [6] − Local minimum • Since 2006, training DNN significantly improved − GPU [7] − More data − Unsupervised pretraining (RBM [8], auto-encoder [9])

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

9 of 50

Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) [11] h

hj ={0,1}

W v vi ={0,1}

• Undirected graphical model

• No connection between visible & hidden units 1 exp {−E(v, h; W )} Z(W ) X X X E(v, h; W ) = − bi vi − cj hj − vi wij hj

p(v, h | W ) =

i

j

wij : weight bi , cj : bias

i,j

• Parameters can be estimated by contrastive divergence learning [10] Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

10 of 50

Deep Belief Network (DBN) [8] • RBMs are stacked to form a DBN • Layer-wise training of RBM is repeated over multiple layers (pretraining) • Joint optimization as DBN or supervised learning as DNN with additional final layer (fine tuning) DNN

DBN

RBM2 RBM1

copy



stacking











Supervised learning as DNN



Output

Input

Input

Input

(Jointly toptimize as DBN) Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

11 of 50

Representation learning DBN + classification layer DNN (feature → classifier) (feature + classifier)

Heiga Zen

Output









Output



DBN (feature extractor)

Input

Input

Input

Unsupervised layer-wise pre-training

Adding output layer (e.g., softmax)

Supervised fine-tuning (backpropagation)

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

12 of 50

Success of DNN in various machine learning tasks Tasks • Vision [12] • Language • Speech [13]

Task Voice Input YouTube

Hours of data 5,870 1,400

Word error rates (%) HMM-GMM HMM-GMM HMM-DNN w/ same data w/ more data 12.3 N/A 16.0 47.6 52.3 N/A

Products • Personalized photo search [14, 15] • Voice search [16, 17]. Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

13 of 50

Conventional HMM-GMM [1] • Decision tree-clustered HMM with GMM state-output distributions Linguistic features x yes yes

no

Acoustic features y

Heiga Zen

no yes

...

no

Acoustic features y

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

15 of 50

Limitation of HMM-GMM approach (1) Hard to integrate feature extraction & modeling

Spectra s 1 s 2 s 3 s 4 s 5

cT dimensinality reduction



⇒ ⇒

... . . ...

⇒ ⇒ ⇒ ⇒ ⇒

Cepstra c 1 c 2 c 3 c 4 c 5

... . . ...

sT

• Typically use lower dimensional approximation of speech spectrum as acoustic feature (e.g., cepstrum, line spectral pairs) • Hard to model spectrum directly by HMM-GMM due to high dimensionality & strong correlation → Waveform-level model [18], mel-cepstral analysis-integrated model [19], STAVOCO [20], MGE-LSD [21] Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

16 of 50

Limitation of HMM-GMM approach (2) Data fragmentation Acoustic space yes yes yes

no no

no yes

...

no yes

no

• Linguistic-to-acoustic mapping by decision trees • Decision tree splits input space into sub-clusters • Inefficient to represent complex dependencies between linguistic & acoustic features → Boosting [4], tree intersection [5], product of experts [22]

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

17 of 50

Motivation to use deep learning in speech synthesis

• Integrating feature extraction − Can model high-dimensional, highly correlated features efficiently − Layered architecture with non-linear operations offers feature extraction to be integrated with acoustic modeling • Distributed representation − Can be exponentially more efficient than fragmented representation − Better representation ability with fewer parameters • Layered hierarchical structure in speech production − concept → linguistic → articulatory → waveform Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

18 of 50

Deep learning-based approaches

Recent applications of deep learning to speech synthesis • HMM-DBN (USTC/MSR [23, 24])

• DBN (CUHK [25])

• DNN (Google [26])

• DNN-GP (IBM [27])

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

20 of 50

HMM-DBN [23, 24] Linguistic features x yes yes

no

no yes

DBN i

no

DBN j

... Acoustic features y

Acoustic features y

• Decision tree-clustered HMM with DBN state-output distributions • DBNs replaces GMMs Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

21 of 50

DBN [25]

h1 h2

v Linguistic features x

h3 v Acoustic features y

• DBN represents joint distribution of linguistic & acoustic features • DBN replaces decision trees and GMMs Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

22 of 50

DNN [26] Acoustic features y

h3 h2 h1

Linguistic features x

• DNN represents conditional distribution of acoustic features given linguistic features • DNN replaces decision trees and GMMs Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

23 of 50

DNN-GP [27] Acoustic features y

Gaussian Process Regression

h3 h2 h1

Linguistic features x

• Uses last hidden layer output as input for Gaussian Process (GP) regression • Replaces last layer of DNN by GP regression Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

24 of 50

Comparison

cep: mel-cepstrum, ap: band aperiodicities x: linguistic features, y: acoustic features, c: cluster index y | x: conditional distribution of y given x (y, x): joint distribution between x and y HMM -GMM cep, ap, F0 parametric y|c←c|x

HMM -DBN spectra parametric y|c←c|x

DBN cep, ap, F0 parametric (y, x)

DNN cep, ap, F0 parametric y|x

DNN -GP F0 non-parametric y|h←h|x

HMM-GMM is more computationally efficients than others

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

25 of 50

Framework Binary features

Duration prediction

Input features including binary & numeric features at frame T

...

Waveform synthesis

Spectral features

Output layer

...

SPEECH

Heiga Zen

...

...

...

Duration feature Frame position feature

Hidden layers

TEXT

Statistics (mean & var) of speech parameter vector sequence

Numeric features

Text analysis

Input features including binary & numeric features at frame 1

Input layer

Input feature extraction

Excitation features V/UV feature

Parameter generation

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

27 of 50

Framework

Is this new? . . . no • NN [28]

• RNN [29] What’s the difference? • More layers, data, computational resources • Better learning algorithm

• Statistical parametric speech synthesis techniques

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

28 of 50

Experimental setup Database Training / test data Sampling rate Analysis window Linguistic features Acoustic features HMM topology DNN architecture Postprocessing

Heiga Zen

US English female speaker 33000 & 173 sentences 16 kHz 25-ms width / 5-ms shift 11 categorical features 25 numeric features 0–39 mel-cepstrum log F0 , 5-band aperiodicity, ∆, ∆2 5-state, left-to-right HSMM [30], MSD F0 [31], MDL [32] 1–5 layers, 256/512/1024/2048 units/layer sigmoid, continuous F0 [33] Postfiltering in cepstrum domain [34]

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

30 of 50

Preliminary experiments • w/ vs w/o grouping questions (e.g., vowel, fricative)

− Grouping (OR operation) can be represented by NN − w/o grouping questions worked more efficiently

• How to encode numeric features for inputs

− Decision tree clustering uses binary questions − Neural network can have numerical values as inputs − Feeding numerical values directly worked more efficiently

• Removing silences − − − −

Heiga Zen

Decision tree splits silence & speech at the top of the tree Single neural network handles both of them Neural network tries to reduce error for silence Better to remove silence frames as preprocessing Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

31 of 50

Example of speech parameter trajectories

5-th Mel-cepstrum

w/o grouping questions, numeric contexts, silence frames removed

Natural speech HMM (α=1) DNN (4x512)

1

0

-1 0

100

200

300

400

500

Frame

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

32 of 50

Objective evaluations

• Objective measures − Aperiodicity distortion (dB) − Voiced/Unvoiced error rates (%) − Mel-cepstral distortion (dB) − RMSE in log F0 • Sizes of decision trees in HMM systems were tuned by scaling (α) the penalty term in the MDL criterion − α < 1: larger trees (more parameters) − α = 1: standard setup − α > 1: smaller trees (fewer parameters)

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

33 of 50

Aperiodicity distortion HMM DNN (256 units / layer)

DNN (512 units / layer)

DNN (1024 units / layer)

DNN (2048 units / layer)

Aperiodicity distortion (dB)

1.32

1.30

α=16

1.28

1

α=4 1

1

1.26

α=1 1

α=0.375

1.24

1.22

2

2

2

2

3 5

3

4

4 1.20 1e+05

3

3

5

4

4

5

5

1e+06

1e+07

Total number of parameters Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

34 of 50

V/UV errors HMM DNN (256 units / layer)

DNN (512 units / layer)

DNN (1024 units / layer)

DNN (2048 units / layer)

Voiced/Unvoiced Error Rate (%)

4.6 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 1e+05

1e+06

1e+07

Total number of parameters Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

35 of 50

Mel-cepstral distortion HMM DNN (256 units / layer)

DNN (512 units / layer)

DNN (1024 units / layer)

DNN (2048 units / layer)

Mel-cepstral distortion (dB)

5.4

5.2

5.0

4.8

4.6 1e+05

1e+06

1e+07

Total number of parameters Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

36 of 50

RMSE in log F 0

RMSE in log F0

HMM DNN (256 units / layer)

DNN (512 units / layer)

DNN (1024 units / layer)

DNN (2048 units / layer)

0.13

0.12 1e+05

1e+06

1e+07

Total number of parameters Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

37 of 50

Subjective evaluations Compared HMM-based systems with DNN-based ones with similar # of parameters • Paired comparison test

• 173 test sentences, 5 subjects per pair • Up to 30 pairs per subject • Crowd-sourced HMM (α) 15.8 (16) 16.1 (4) 12.7 (1)

Heiga Zen

DNN (#layers × #units) 38.5 (4 × 256) 27.2 (4 × 512) 36.6 (4 × 1 024)

Neutral 45.7 56.8 50.7

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

p value < 10−6 < 10−6 < 10−6

z value -9.9 -5.1 -11.5

August 31st, 2013

38 of 50

Conclusion

Deep learning in speech synthesis • Aims to replace HMM with acoustic model based on deep architectures • Different groups presented different architectures at ICASSP 2013 − HMM-DBN − DBN − DNN − DNN-GP • DNN-based approach achieved reasonable performance • Many possible future research topics

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

39 of 50

References I [1]

T. Yoshimura, K. Tokuda, T. Masuko, T. Kobayashi, and T. Kitamura. Simultaneous modeling of spectrum, pitch and duration in HMM-based speech synthesis. In Proc. Eurospeech, pages 2347–2350, 1999.

[2]

H. Zen, K. Tokuda, and A. Black. Statistical parametric speech synthesis. Speech Commun., 51(11):1039–1064, 2009.

[3]

Y. Bengio. Learning deep architectures for AI. Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, 2(1):1–127, 2009.

[4]

Y. Qian, H. Liang, and F. Soong. Generating natural F0 trajectory with additive trees. In Proc. Interspeech, pages 2126–2129, 2008.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

40 of 50

References II [5]

K. Yu, H. Zen, F. Mairesse, and S. Young. Context adaptive training with factorized decision trees for HMM-based statistical parametric speech synthesis. Speech Commun., 53(6):914–923, 2011.

[6]

S. Hochreiter, Y. Bengio, P. Frasconi, and J. Schmidhuber. Gradient flow in recurrent nets: the difficulty of learning long-term dependencies. In S. Kremer and J. Kolen, editors, A field guide to dynamical recurrent neural networks. IEEE Press, 2001.

[7]

R. Raina, A. Madhavan, and A. Ng. Large-scale deep unsupervised learning using graphics processors. In Proc. ICML, volume 9, pages 873–880, 2009.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

41 of 50

References III

[8]

G. Hinton, S. Osindero, and Y.W. Teh. A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural Computation, 18(7):1527–1554, 2006.

[9]

P. Vincent, H. Larochelle, I. Lajoie, Y. Bengio, and P.-A. Manzagol. Stacked denoising autoencoders: Learning useful representations in a deep network with a local denoising criterion. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 11:3371–3408, 2010.

[10] G.E. Hinton. Training products of experts by minimizing contrastive divergence. Neural Computation, 14(8):1771–1800, 2002.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

42 of 50

References IV [11] P Smolensky. Information processing in dynamical systems: Foundations of harmony theory. In D. Rumelhard and J. McClelland, editors, Parallel Distributed Processing, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 194–281. MIT Press, 1986. [12] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. Hinton. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Proc. NIPS, pages 1106–1114, 2012. [13] G. Hinton, L. Deng, D. Yu, G. Dahl, A.-R. Mohamed, N. Jaitly, A. Senior, V. Vanhoucke, P. Nguyen, T. Sainath, and B. Kingsbury. Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition: The shared views of four research groups. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 29(6):82–97, 2012. Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

43 of 50

References V

[14] C. Rosenberg. Improving photo search: a step across the semantic gap. http://googleresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/ improving-photo-search-step-across.html. [15] K. Yu. https://plus.sandbox.google.com/103688557111379853702/ posts/fdw7EQX87Eq. [16] V. Vanhoucke. Speech recognition and deep learning. http://googleresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/ speech-recognition-and-deep-learning.html.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

44 of 50

References VI [17] Bing makes voice recognition on Windows Phone more accurate and twice as fast. http://www.bing.com/blogs/site_blogs/b/search/archive/ 2013/06/17/dnn.aspx. [18] R. Maia, H. Zen, and M. Gales. Statistical parametric speech synthesis with joint estimation of acoustic and excitation model parameters. In Proc. ISCA SSW7, pages 88–93, 2010. [19] K. Nakamura, K. Hashimoto, Y. Nankaku, and K. Tokuda. Integration of acoustic modeling and mel-cepstral analysis for HMM-based speech synthesis. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 7883–7887, 2013.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

45 of 50

References VII

[20] T. Toda and K. Tokuda. Statistical approach to vocal tract transfer function estimation based on factor analyzed trajectory hmm. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 3925–3928, 2008. [21] Y.-J. Wu and K. Tokuda. Minimum generation error training with direct log spectral distortion on LSPs for HMM-based speech synthesis. In Proc. Interspeech, pages 577–580, 2008. [22] H. Zen, M. Gales, Y. Nankaku, and K. Tokuda. Product of experts for statistical parametric speech synthesis. IEEE Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process., 20(3):794–805, 2012.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

46 of 50

References VIII

[23] Z.-H. Ling, L. Deng, and D. Yu. Modeling spectral envelopes using restricted Boltzmann machines for statistical parametric speech synthesis. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 7825–7829, 2013. [24] Z.-H. Ling, L. Deng, and D. Yu. Modeling spectral envelopes using restricted Boltzmann machines and deep belief networks for statistical parametric speech synthesis. IEEE Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process., 21(10):2129–2139, 2013. [25] S. Kang, X. Qian, and H. Meng. Multi-distribution deep belief network for speech synthesis. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 8012–8016, 2013.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

47 of 50

References IX [26] H. Zen, A. Senior, and M. Schuster. Statistical parametric speech synthesis using deep neural networks. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 7962–7966, 2013. [27] R. Fernandez, A. Rendel, B. Ramabhadran, and R. Hoory. F0 contour prediction with a deep belief network-Gaussian process hybrid model. In Proc. ICASSP, pages 6885–6889, 2013. [28] O. Karaali, G. Corrigan, and I. Gerson. Speech synthesis with neural networks. In Proc. World Congress on Neural Networks, pages 45–50, 1996. [29] C. Tuerk and T. Robinson. Speech synthesis using artificial network trained on cepstral coefficients. In Proc. Eurospeech, pages 1713–1716, 1993. Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

48 of 50

References X [30] H. Zen, K. Tokuda, T. Masuko, T. Kobayashi, and T. Kitamura. A hidden semi-Markov model-based speech synthesis system. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst., E90-D(5):825–834, 2007. [31] K. Tokuda, T. Masuko, N. Miyazaki, and T. Kobayashi. Multi-space probability distribution HMM. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst., E85-D(3):455–464, 2002. [32] K. Shinoda and T. Watanabe. Acoustic modeling based on the MDL criterion for speech recognition. In Proc. Eurospeech, pages 99–102, 1997. [33] K. Yu and S. Young. Continuous F0 modelling for HMM based statistical parametric speech synthesis. IEEE Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process., 19(5):1071–1079, 2011. Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

49 of 50

References XI

[34] T. Yoshimura, K. Tokuda, T. Masuko, T. Kobayashi, and T. Kitamura. Incorporation of mixed excitation model and postfilter into HMM-based text-to-speech synthesis. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst., J87-D-II(8):1563–1571, 2004.

Heiga Zen

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis

August 31st, 2013

50 of 50

Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis - Research at Google

Aug 31, 2013 - Heiga Zen. Deep Learning in Speech Synthesis. August 31st, 2013. 6 of 50 ..... w/ vs w/o grouping questions (e.g., vowel, fricative). − Grouping ...

2MB Sizes 2 Downloads 101 Views

Recommend Documents

Learning with Deep Cascades - Research at Google
based on feature monomials of degree k, or polynomial functions of degree k, ... on finding the best trade-off between computational cost and classification accu-.

Learning the Speech Front-end With Raw ... - Research at Google
tion in time approach that is inspired by the frequency-domain mel filterbank similar to [7], to model the raw waveform on the short frame-level timescale.

Deep Learning Methods for Efficient Large ... - Research at Google
Jul 26, 2017 - Google Cloud & YouTube-8M Video. Understanding Challenge ... GAP scores are from private leaderboard. Models. MoNN. LSTM GRU.

Large Vocabulary Automatic Speech ... - Research at Google
Sep 6, 2015 - child speech relatively better than adult. ... Speech recognition for adults has improved significantly over ..... caying learning rate was used. 4.1.

Challenges in Automatic Speech Recognition - Research at Google
Case Study:Google Search by Voice. Carries 25% of USA Google mobile search queries! ... speech-rich sub-domains such as lectures/talks in ... of modest size; 2-3 orders of magnitude more data is available multi-linguality built-in from start.

Deep Boosting - Proceedings of Machine Learning Research
ysis, with performance guarantees in terms of the margins ... In many successful applications of AdaBoost, H is reduced .... Our proof technique exploits standard tools used to de- ..... {0,..., 9}, fold i was used for testing, fold i +1(mod 10).