Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the efficacy of global anchoring versus pairwise verification for open-set source tracing in synthetic speech, revealing that global anchoring achieves a significantly lower in-domain error rate (8.61% EER) compared to pairwise methods (12-15% EER). The authors attribute the performance gap to the way pairwise objectives concentrate variance into fewer embedding directions, which diminishes resolution among closely related generators. An embedding-space analysis further indicates that the observed performance difference cannot be solely explained by dimensionality constraints, highlighting the impact of the pairwise objective on the embedding structure.
Global anchoring outperforms pairwise verification in synthetic speech source tracing, revealing hidden pitfalls in the latter's approach to metric learning.
Open-set source tracing is increasingly framed as a verification problem, motivating the use of pairwise metric-learning objectives from biometrics. We thus compare global anchoring and pairwise verification under matched backbones and a fixed data and epoch budget on MLAAD (in-domain) and STOPA (out-of-domain). In our runs, global anchoring yields lower in-domain error (8.61% EER) than pairwise variants (12-15% EER), even with rival mining and XLS-R finetuning. Because pairwise objectives optimize similarity directly, they concentrate variance into fewer embedding directions, reducing resolution among closely related generators. To test if this drives the drop, we impose a similar bottleneck to the globally supervised baseline, yet the baseline remains competitive. Together with an embedding-space analysis ($k_{99}$), these results suggest that the gap is not explained by dimensionality alone, but rather by the pairwise objective's shaping of the retained directions.
