Speaker identification using higher order spectral phase features and their effectiveness vis-a-vis Mel-Cepstral features

The effectiveness of higher-order spectral (HOS) phase features in speaker recognition is investigated by comparison with Mel Cepstral features on the same speech data. HOS phase features retain phase information from the Fourier spectrum unlikeMel–frequency Cepstral coefficients (MFCC). Gaussian mixture models are constructed from Mel– Cepstral features and HOS features, respectively, for the same data from various speakers in the Switchboard telephone Speech Corpus. Feature clusters, model parameters and classification performance are analyzed. HOS phase features on their own provide a correct identification rate of about 97% on the chosen subset of the corpus. This is the same level of accuracy as provided by MFCCs. Cluster plots and model parameters are compared to show that HOS phase features can provide complementary information to better discriminate between speakers.

Screening for drugs in oral fluid : illicit drug use and drug driving in a sample of urban and regional Queensland motorists

Police services in a number of Australian states and overseas jurisdictions have begun to implement or consider random road-side drug testing of drivers. This paper outlines research conducted to provide an estimate of the extent of drug driving in a sample of Queensland drivers in regional, rural and metropolitan areas. Oral fluid samples were collected from 2657 Queensland motorists and screened for illicit substances including cannabis (delta 9 tetrahydrocannibinol [THC]), amphetamines, ecstasy, and cocaine. Overall, 3.8% of the sample (n = 101) screened positive for at least one illicit substance, although multiple drugs were identified in a sample of 23 respondents. The most common drugs detected in oral fluid were ecstasy (n = 53), and cannabis (n = 46) followed by amphetamines (n = 23). A key finding was that cannabis was confirmed as the most common self-reported drug combined with driving and that individuals who tested positive to any drug through oral fluid analysis were also more likely to report the highest frequency of drug driving. Furthermore, a comparison between drug vs. drink driving detection rates for one region of the study, revealed a higher detection rate for drug driving (3.8%) vs. drink driving (0.8%). This research provides evidence that drug driving is relatively prevalent on Queensland roads, and may in fact be more common than drink driving. This paper will further outline the study findings’ and present possible directions for future drug driving research.