Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Compare and display benchmarks with other libs #114

Closed
hughrawlinson opened this issue Feb 10, 2016 · 9 comments
Closed

Compare and display benchmarks with other libs #114

hughrawlinson opened this issue Feb 10, 2016 · 9 comments

Comments

@hughrawlinson
Copy link
Member

Compare and display the results of our automated benchmarking against similar benchmarks from other libraries

This is not a subtask of #103 because it's a bit of a deep dive, and would likely block the release for longer than should be acceptable.

It would require finding other libraries with benchmarking suites, normalizing the result data against each other, and storing this data somewhere. Could also include automated benchmarking upon commit, and a small comparison API that we use in the gh-pages branch.

It is, of course, obviously blocked on #90.

@nevosegal
Copy link
Collaborator

Are you talking about other JS libraries? If so, I'm not sure they exist atm.. If you're talking about stuff like YAAFE and Librosa I'm not sure it'll look very pretty :P.

@hughrawlinson
Copy link
Member Author

I'm talking about any other feature libraries. I'm sure it won't look pretty (unless we normalize for general language benchmarks), but it'll be a decent incentive for us to learn optimization.

@nevosegal
Copy link
Collaborator

I agree about comparing the results to other libraries, not sure what it will give if we display them. But yeah, definitely an important thing that we should do.

@hughrawlinson
Copy link
Member Author

How do you mean "what it will give"? What the point would be? I mean, I'm thinking about the cli, right? IMO it's important to be transparent about the amount of time we take in comparison with other options. The "obviously it'll be slow it's javascript" argument doesn't hold with me because a) it doesn't say how slow it'll be in comparison to other options, and b) I can imagine someone finding Meyda through search, and not really knowing about Javascript's comparative speed.

@AhmedHamedTN
Copy link

Seriously, is it any good ??

@hughrawlinson
Copy link
Member Author

@AhmedHamedTN is what any good?

@AhmedHamedTN
Copy link

@hughrawlinson To use Meyda for audio feature extraction for my research on depression clues in speech.
Thank you for replying so soon.

@hughrawlinson
Copy link
Member Author

hughrawlinson commented May 4, 2016

This issue isn't the right forum to have this discussion, but I'll give you an overview and if anything is unclear you can reach out to me on twitter or via the email listed on my github profile.

Can Meyda detect signs of depression in speech: no, not out of the box. Meyda provides low level audio features that describe basic properties of sound, rather than infer any semantic information about its contents. You could however use Meyda to construct a labeled dataset based on a corpus of recordings and use some supervised classification technique to build a model, and as long as you can run the model in the browser, you could use Meyda as input to the model. I believe MFCC features are particularly useful for as feature dimensions on datasets based on vocal recordings. As for the choice in modelling technique: I don't know which classifiers are likely to have the lowest misclassification rates in this application, but I would imagine random forests would be suitably performant for most web applications. Alternatively, you could call out to a server-side process.

In summary: It'll require some knowledge of machine learning, but it is (at least theoretically) possible.

@AhmedHamedTN
Copy link

@hughrawlinson Thank you for this brief explanation sir, i sent you an email.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants