ESPnet-SPK: add ASVspoof19 SASV recipe#5687
Conversation
… into asvspoof19_spk
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
@Jungjee, can you review this? |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5687 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 72.21% 76.61% +4.39%
==========================================
Files 760 761 +1
Lines 69840 69880 +40
==========================================
+ Hits 50435 53536 +3101
+ Misses 19405 16344 -3061
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| ) as f_utt2spk, open(os.path.join(dst, "wav.scp"), "w") as f_wav: | ||
|
|
||
| for spk in spk2utt: | ||
| f_spk2utt.write(f"{spk} {' '.join(spk2utt[spk])}\n") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
note that there's an utt2spk to spk2utt script within ESPnet.
| @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ | |||
| #!/usr/bin/env bash | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[question] Where do we need this?
Do we need the train and the validation sets as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No. I did not use this. I thought perhaps someone using the recipe might want to do some in-domain finetuning. I could take it out if it is not needed.
Hi @Jungjee , |
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
Hi @Jungjee,
|
I reran the CI |
Thank you. Seems to be okay now |
|
Thanks @Alexgichamba for the updates and your effort!!
I see. For me, it's okay to leave, but not so sure how @sw005320 would think about this.
Yes, it may give more consistency with other parts. But to me, the current status is also okay.
Now it's gone, thanks Shinji! |
We can leave it, then. |
|
Thanks, @Alexgichamba |
|
What?
Add a spk1 recipe on the ASVspoof19 Logical Access ASV subset.
Why?
Provide diverse recipes for ESPnet-SPK, adding an SASV example.
See also
ASVspoof19