fassabilf's picture
Upload folder using huggingface_hub
7063b76 verified
|
Raw
History Blame Contribute Delete
4.4 kB

Dataset Description

Overview

The dataset contains 7,002 four-second WAV recordings of English speech — half from real human speakers, half generated by neural TTS systems.

  • Train: 5,748 clips (2,874 real, 2,874 fake)
  • Test: 1,254 clips (627 real, 627 fake, labels withheld)
  • Audio: 16 kHz, mono, 16-bit PCM WAV, exactly 4 seconds

The test set is speaker-disjoint (no test speaker appears in training) and includes audio from at least one TTS system not seen during training.


Sources

Real speech:

  • VCTK Corpus — 109 English speakers, various accents (CC BY 4.0)
  • LibriSpeech — read speech from audiobooks (CC BY 4.0)

Fake speech:

  • Tacotron2 — attention-based seq2seq TTS (Shen et al., 2018)
  • VITS — end-to-end TTS with normalizing flows (Kim et al., 2021)
  • SpeechT5 — unified-modal encoder-decoder (Ao et al., 2022)

Files

File Description
train/real/ 2,874 real speech WAV files
train/fake/ 2,874 TTS-generated WAV files
test/ 1,254 test WAV files, flat directory, no labels
train.csv Training labels: id, label
test.csv Test file list: id (no label)
sample_submission.csv Example submission with score=0.5 for all
solution.csv Ground truth labels (for local AUROC scoring)
notebooks/ 6 reference notebooks (starter + 5 graded approaches)

train.csv

id,label
train/real/real_00001.wav,real
train/real/real_00002.wav,real
train/fake/fake_00001.wav,fake
train/fake/fake_00002.wav,fake
...
  • label: "real" or "fake"

test.csv

id
test/voiceguard_00001.wav
test/voiceguard_00002.wav
...

sample_submission.csv

id,score
test/voiceguard_00001.wav,0.5
test/voiceguard_00002.wav,0.5
...

Replace 0.5 with your model's P(fake) score for each clip.


Directory Structure

train/
├── real/
│   ├── real_00001.wav    # VCTK / LibriSpeech recordings
│   └── ...               # 2,874 files total
└── fake/
    ├── fake_00001.wav    # Tacotron2 / VITS / SpeechT5 output
    └── ...               # 2,874 files total

test/
└── voiceguard_00001.wav ... voiceguard_01254.wav   # flat, no labels

Loading Audio

import librosa
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd

train_df = pd.read_csv("train.csv")
train_df["label_int"] = (train_df["label"] == "fake").astype(int)

y, sr = librosa.load(train_df.iloc[0]["id"], sr=16000)
# y.shape = (64000,) — exactly 4 seconds at 16 kHz

# Anti-spoofing features
flatness  = librosa.feature.spectral_flatness(y=y).mean()
mfcc      = librosa.feature.mfcc(y=y, sr=sr, n_mfcc=20)
zcr       = librosa.feature.zero_crossing_rate(y).mean()

# Harmonics-to-Noise Ratio (handle infinity!)
f0, voiced, _ = librosa.pyin(y, fmin=50, fmax=400, sr=sr)
# Note: autocorrelation-based HNR may return np.inf for very periodic signals
# Always apply: np.nan_to_num(hnr, nan=0.0, posinf=0.0, neginf=0.0)

Key Acoustic Differences

Understanding why fake speech is detectable helps you build better features:

Feature Real Speech TTS/Fake Speech
Spectral flatness Low (~0.001–0.01) — peaky harmonic spectrum Higher (~0.05–0.3) — smoother spectrum
Pitch micro-variation Natural jitter (±1–3%) Machine-perfect, overly smooth F0
HNR Moderate, with natural noise floor Very high or infinite (no noise)
LFCC smoothness Frame-to-frame variation Over-smooth transitions
Spectral envelope Slight roughness from vocal tract Unnaturally clean

Important Notes

  • All WAV files are exactly 4 seconds (64,000 samples). No padding needed.
  • Generalization: the test set includes a TTS system not seen during training. Feature-based models (LFCC, spectral features) generalize better than models that memorize artifacts of specific synthesizers.
  • AUROC not accuracy: always output probability scores (0–1), not binary predictions. See the Evaluation page.
  • Both real and fake speech are English only in this dataset.
  • Dataset is CC BY 4.0. Attribution: VCTK (Yamagishi et al.), LibriSpeech (Panayotov et al.), ASVspoof challenge.