Leveraging Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) and Generative Pre -trained Transformer ( GPT ) Fusion for Accurate Accent Classification in English


Abstract

This study undertakes an in-depth review of the development of a reliable language-identification system using deep-learning techniques. The primary goal was to extract the mel -frequency cepstral coefficients from audio files and use a transformer-based model to classify the languages. The dataset includes audio recordings in five languages: Spanish, Arabic, Dutch, Pashto , and Russian. Originally, the audio files of each language were processed separately to extract relevant features, thereby avoiding the disadvantages of combining more than one file to create a single dataset . These features were standardized and used to train a transformer model that could handle sequential data and was particularly suited to audio signals. The model presented in this study was subjected to extensive training and testing, yielding a significant increase in accuracy over traditional methods. Early stopping was used to avoid overfitting , thereby ensuring that the model preserved its generalization ability for a wide range of audio examples. The model was then evaluated using metrics such as confusion matrices and classification reports, which showed that it could distinguish among the five target languages. This study further advances research on language processing by offering a solution that is both efficient and scalable , with potential applications in real-time communication for language identification systems and multilingual interfaces.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].