BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Chunyi Wang

Chunyi Wang contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
ComputationComputation and Languageeess.ASMachine LearningSound

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
5topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Speech Emotion Recognition Based on Multi-feature and Multi-lingual Fusion

A speech emotion recognition algorithm based on multi-feature and Multi-lingual fusion is proposed in order to resolve low recognition accuracy caused by lack of large speech dataset and low robustness of acoustic features in the recognition of speech emotion. First, handcrafted and deep automatic features are extracted from existing data in Chinese and English speech emotions. Then, the various features are fused respectively. Finally, the fused features of different languages are fused again and trained in a classification model. Distinguishing the fused features with the unfused ones, the results manifest that the fused features significantly enhance the accuracy of speech emotion recognition algorithm. The proposed solution is evaluated on the two Chinese corpus and two English corpus, and is shown to provide more accurate predictions compared to original solution. As a result of this study, the multi-feature and Multi-lingual fusion algorithm can significantly improve the speech emotion recognition accuracy when the dataset is small.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

MCMC methods for Gaussian process models using fast approximations for the likelihood

Gaussian Process (GP) models are a powerful and flexible tool for non-parametric regression and classification. Computation for GP models is intensive, since computing the posterior density, $π$, for covariance function parameters requires computation of the covariance matrix, C, a $pn^2$ operation, where p is the number of covariates and n is the number of training cases, and then inversion of C, an $n^3$ operation. We introduce MCMC methods based on the "temporary mapping and caching" framework, using a fast approximation, $π^*$, as the distribution needed to construct the temporary space. We propose two implementations under this scheme: "mapping to a discretizing chain", and "mapping with tempered transitions", both of which are exactly correct MCMC methods for sampling $π$, even though their transitions are constructed using an approximation. These methods are equivalent when their tuning parameters are set at the simplest values, but differ in general. We compare how well these methods work when using several approximations, finding on synthetic datasets that a $π^*$ based on the "Subset of Data" (SOD) method is almost always more efficient than standard MCMC using only $π$. On some datasets, a more sophisticated $π^*$ based on the "Nyström-Cholesky" method works better than SOD.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Gaussian Process Regression with Heteroscedastic or Non-Gaussian Residuals

Gaussian Process (GP) regression models typically assume that residuals are Gaussian and have the same variance for all observations. However, applications with input-dependent noise (heteroscedastic residuals) frequently arise in practice, as do applications in which the residuals do not have a Gaussian distribution. In this paper, we propose a GP Regression model with a latent variable that serves as an additional unobserved covariate for the regression. This model (which we call GPLC) allows for heteroscedasticity since it allows the function to have a changing partial derivative with respect to this unobserved covariate. With a suitable covariance function, our GPLC model can handle (a) Gaussian residuals with input-dependent variance, or (b) non-Gaussian residuals with input-dependent variance, or (c) Gaussian residuals with constant variance. We compare our model, using synthetic datasets, with a model proposed by Goldberg, Williams and Bishop (1998), which we refer to as GPLV, which only deals with case (a), as well as a standard GP model which can handle only case (c). Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods are developed for both modelsl. Experiments show that when the data is heteroscedastic, both GPLC and GPLV give better results (smaller mean squared error and negative log-probability density) than standard GP regression. In addition, when the residual are Gaussian, our GPLC model is generally nearly as good as GPLV, while when the residuals are non-Gaussian, our GPLC model is better than GPLV.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access