Distinguishing Neural Speech Synthesis Models Through Fingerprints in Speech Waveforms

Overview

• Recent advancements in neural speech synthesis have introduced new challenges, including concerns about potential misuse or abuse.
• Identifying the source of synthesized speech is valuable for forensics and intellectual property protection, but prior work has limitations.
• This paper investigates the existence of speech synthesis model fingerprints in the generated waveforms, focusing on the acoustic model and vocoder.
• The research uses the multi-speaker LibriTTS dataset to study the influence of each component on the fingerprint in the overall speech waveforms.

Plain English Explanation

Artificial intelligence (AI) has made significant progress in creating highly realistic-sounding synthetic speech, also known as text-to-speech. While these advancements have enabled many useful applications, they have also raised concerns about potential misuse or abuse, such as the creation of fake audio or the impersonation of real people.

One important area of research is the ability to identify the source of synthesized speech, which could be valuable for forensic investigations or protecting intellectual property. However, previous work in this area has had some limitations.

This paper explores the idea that each speech synthesis model, consisting of an acoustic model and a vocoder, might leave a unique "fingerprint" or signature in the generated audio waveforms. The researchers used a dataset called LibriTTS, which contains speech samples from multiple speakers, to investigate these potential fingerprints.

Their key findings are:

1. Both the acoustic model and the vocoder impart distinct, model-specific fingerprints on the generated waveforms.
2. The vocoder fingerprint is more dominant and can potentially mask the fingerprint from the acoustic model.

These results suggest that both the acoustic model and vocoder used in a speech synthesis system could be identified based on the unique characteristics they leave in the generated audio. This could have important applications in detecting synthetic audio and attributing the source of generated speech.

Technical Explanation

The researchers investigated the existence of speech synthesis model fingerprints in the generated waveforms, with a focus on the acoustic model and the vocoder. They used the multi-speaker LibriTTS dataset to study the influence of each component on the fingerprint in the overall speech waveforms.

The experiments revealed two key insights:

1. Vocoders and acoustic models impart distinct, model-specific fingerprints on the waveforms they generate. This suggests that each speech synthesis model, consisting of an acoustic model and a vocoder, leaves a unique signature in the generated audio.
2. Vocoder fingerprints are more dominant and may mask the fingerprints from the acoustic model. This means that the distinct characteristics introduced by the vocoder are more prominent in the final waveform, potentially overshadowing the fingerprint of the acoustic model.

These findings highlight the potential utility of model-specific fingerprints for both the acoustic model and the vocoder in source identification applications, such as forensics and intellectual property protection.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides valuable insights into the potential existence of speech synthesis model fingerprints, which could have important implications for detecting and attributing the source of synthetic speech. However, the research also has some limitations that should be considered:

1. The study was conducted using the LibriTTS dataset, which may not be representative of all speech synthesis models and datasets. Further research is needed to evaluate the generalizability of these findings to other datasets and model architectures.

2. The paper does not explore the potential impact of factors like background noise, audio quality, or other real-world conditions on the detectability of these fingerprints. Addressing these factors could be an important next step in making this approach more robust for practical applications.

3. While the research suggests the existence of model-specific fingerprints, it does not provide a clear understanding of the specific acoustic characteristics or features that define these fingerprints. Further investigation into the underlying mechanisms could lead to more reliable and generalizable detection methods.

It is also worth considering the potential ethical implications of this research, as the ability to identify the source of synthetic speech could be used both for legitimate purposes, such as forensics and intellectual property protection, as well as for malicious purposes, such as surveillance or censorship. Responsible development and deployment of these technologies will be crucial.

Conclusion

This paper presents an important step forward in understanding the potential for speech synthesis models to leave unique fingerprints in the generated waveforms. The findings suggest that both the acoustic model and the vocoder used in a speech synthesis system can impart distinct, model-specific characteristics that could be leveraged for source identification applications.

These insights have implications for the development of more robust synthetic audio detection and model attribution techniques, which could be valuable for protecting intellectual property, conducting forensic investigations, and addressing the challenges posed by the growing prevalence of synthetic media. However, further research is needed to fully understand the practical limitations and potential ethical concerns associated with this technology.