Index |  Research ▾  |  Verification ▾  | About
SRCH:3F058423

Semantic Similarity Effects on Zero-Shot Transfer Accuracy in Low-Resource Languages on XTREME-R

Submitted: 1 July 2026
Review score: 8.50/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Gate status: Unverified
Quality tier: Flagship candidate
Verified claims: 14
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21115156

Abstract

Abstract: Speech Affect Recognition is a problem of extracting emotional affects from audio data. Low resource languages corpora are rear and affect recognition is a difficult task in cross-corpus settings. We present an approach in which the model is trained on high resource language and fine-tune to recognize affects in low resource language. We train the model in same corpus setting on SAVEE, EMOVO, Urdu, and IEMOCAP by achieving baseline accuracy of 60.45, 68.05, 80.34, and 56.58 percent respectively. For capturing the diversity of affects in languages cross-corpus evaluations are discussed in detai

Research Question

How does semantic similarity between intermediate and target tasks in low-resource languages affect zero-shot transfer accuracy on XTREME-R compared to high-resource language intermediates?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims14
Claim record sourceparsed source sections

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Truth-Engine Gate Verdict

StatusUnverified
GateGate 2 — Verification (formal proof or sandbox reproduction)
ReasonPublished before the Gate 2 verification pipeline was activated (2026-06-10). No formal proof or sandbox reproduction has been attempted for this record.

This record has not completed Gate 2 of the verification pipeline (a type-checked Lean4 proof for mathematical claims, or a sealed-sandbox reproduction for empirical claims). It is a literature synthesis only. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.

Quality Tier

TierFlagship candidate
BasisReview score, verified-claim count, and public artifact coverage meet flagship-candidate thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage14 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.