user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Adversarial Audio Synthesis

Paper content:
Audio signals are sampled at high temporal resolutions, and learning to synthesize audio requires capturing structure across a range of timescales.
Generative adversarial networks (GANs) have seen wide success at generating images that are both locally and globally coherent, but they have seen little application to audio generation.
In this paper we introduce WaveGAN, a first attempt at applying GANs to unsupervised synthesis of raw-waveform audio.
WaveGAN is capable of synthesizing one second slices of audio waveforms with global coherence, suitable for sound effect generation.
Our experiments demonstrate that—without labels—WaveGAN learns to produce intelligible words when trained on a small-vocabulary speech dataset, and can also synthesize audio from other domains such as drums, bird vocalizations, and piano.
We compare WaveGAN to a method which applies GANs designed for image generation on image-like audio feature representations, finding both approaches to be promising.
Synthesizing audio for specific domains has many practical applications in creative sound design for music and film.
Musicians and Foley artists scour large databases of sound effects to find particular audio recordings suitable for specific scenarios.
This strategy is painstaking and may result in a negative outcome if the ideal sound effect does not exist in the library.
A better approach might allow a sound artist to explore a compact latent space of audio, taking broad steps to find the types of sounds they are looking for (e.g. footsteps) and making small adjustments to latent variables to finetune (e.g. a large boot lands on a gravel path).
However, audio signals have high temporal resolution, and strategies that learn such a representation must perform effectively in high dimensions.Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) (Goodfellow et al., 2014) are one such unsupervised strategy for mapping low-dimensional latent vectors to high-dimensional data.
The potential advantages of GAN-based approaches to audio synthesis are numerous.
Firstly, GANs could be useful for data augmentation (Shrivastava et al., 2017) in data-hungry speech recognition systems.
Secondly, GANs could enable rapid and straightforward sampling of large amounts of audio.
Furthermore, while the usefulness of generating static images with GANs is arguable, there are many applications (e.g. Foley) for which generating sound effects is immediately useful.
But despite their increasing fidelity at synthesizing images (Radford et al., 2016; BID2 Karras et al., 2018) , GANs have yet to be demonstrated capable of synthesizing audio in an unsupervised setting.A naïve solution for applying image-generating GANs to audio would be to operate them on imagelike spectrograms, i.e., time-frequency representations of audio.
This practice of bootstrapping image recognition algorithms for audio tasks is commonplace in the discriminative setting (Hershey et al., 2017) .
In the generative setting however, this approach is problematic as the most perceptually-informed spectrograms are non-invertible, and hence cannot be listened to without lossy estimations (Griffin & Lim, 1984) or learned inversion models (Shen et al., 2018) .Recent
work (van den Oord et al., 2016; Mehri et al., 2017) has shown that neural networks can be trained with autoregression to operate on raw audio. Such approaches
are attractive as they dispense with engineered feature representations. However, unlike
with GANs, the autoregressive setting results in slow generation as output audio samples must be fed back into the model one at a time.In this work, we investigate both waveform and spectrogram strategies for generating one-second slices of audio with GANs.1 For our spectrogram
approach (SpecGAN), we first design a spectrogram representation that allows for approximate inversion, and bootstrap the two-dimensional deep convolutional GAN (DCGAN) method (Radford et al., 2016) to operate on these spectrograms. In WaveGAN, our waveform
approach, we flatten the DCGAN architecture to operate in one dimension, resulting in a model with the same number of parameters and numerical operations as its twodimensional analog. With WaveGAN, we provide
both a starting point for practical audio synthesis with GANs and a recipe for modifying other image generation methods to operate on waveforms.We primarily envisage our method being applied to the generation of short sound effects suitable for use in music and film. For example, we trained
a WaveGAN on drums, resulting in a procedural drum machine designed to assist electronic musicians (demo chrisdonahue.com/wavegan). However, human evaluation
for such domain-specific tasks would require expert listeners. Therefore, we also consider
a speech benchmark, facilitating straightforward assessment by human annotators. Specifically, we explore a
task where success can easily be judged by any English speaker: generating examples of spoken digits "zero" through "nine".Though our evaluation focuses
on a speech generation task, we note that it is not our goal to develop a text-to-speech synthesizer. Instead, our investigation concerns
whether unsupervised strategies can learn global structure (e.g. words in speech data) implicit in high-dimensional audio signals without conditioning. Our experiments on speech demonstrate
that both WaveGAN and SpecGAN can generate spoken digits that are intelligible to humans. On criteria of sound quality and speaker
diversity, human judges indicate a preference for the audio generated by WaveGAN compared to that from SpecGAN.
Results for our evaluation appear in TAB0 .
We also evaluate our metrics on the real training data, the real test data, and a version of SC09 generated by a parametric speech synthesizer BID4 .
We also compare to SampleRNN (Mehri et al., 2017) and two public implementations of WaveNet (van den Oord et al., 2016), but neither method produced competitive results (details in Appendix B), and we excluded them from further evaluation.
These autoregressive models have not previously been examined on small-vocabulary speech data, and their success at generating full words has only been demonstrated when conditioning on rich linguistic features.
Sound examples for all experiments can be found at chrisdonahue.com/wavegan_examples.While the maximum inception score for SC09 is 10, any score higher than the test set score of 8 should be seen as evidence that a generative model has overfit.
Our best WaveGAN model uses phase shuffle with n = 2 and achieves an inception score of 4.7.
To compare the effect of phase shuffle to other common regularizers, we also tried using 50% dropout in the discriminator's activations, which resulted in a lower score.
Phase shuffle decreased the inception score of SpecGAN, possibly because the operation has an exaggerated effect when applied to the compact temporal axis of spectrograms.Most experiments produced |D| self (diversity) values higher than that of the test data, and all experiments produced |D| train (distance from training data) values higher than that of the test data.
While these measures indicate that our generative models produce examples with statistics that deviate from those of the real data, neither metric indicates that the models achieve high inception scores by the trivial solutions outlined in Section 6.2.Compared to examples from WaveGAN, examples from SpecGAN achieve higher inception score (6.0 vs. 4.7) and are labeled more accurately by humans (66% vs. 58%).
However, on subjective criteria of sound quality and speaker diversity, humans indicate a preference for examples from WaveGAN.
It appears that SpecGAN might better capture the variance in the underlying data compared to WaveGAN, but its success is compromised by sound quality issues when its spectrograms are inverted to audio.
It is possible that the poor qualitative ratings for examples from SpecGAN are primarily caused by the lossy Griffin-Lim inversion (Griffin & Lim, 1984) and not the generative procedure itself.
We see promise in both waveform and spectrogram audio generation with GANs; our study does not suggest a decisive winner.
For a more thorough investigation of spectrogram generation methods, we point to follow-up work BID10 .Finally
, we train WaveGAN and SpecGAN models on the four other domains listed in Section 5. Somewhat
surprisingly, we find that the frequency-domain spectra produced by WaveGAN (a timedomain method) are visually more consistent with the training data (e.g. in terms of sharpness) than those produced by SpecGAN FIG0
We present WaveGAN, the first application of GANs to unsupervised audio generation.
WaveGAN is fully parallelizable and can generate hours of audio in only a few seconds.
In its current form, WaveGAN can be used for creative sound design in multimedia production.
In our future work we plan to extend WaveGAN to operate on variable-length audio and also explore a variety of label conditioning strategies.
By providing a template for modifying image generation models to operate on audio, we hope that this work catalyzes future investigation of GANs for audio synthesis.
Post-processing filters reject frequencies corresponding to noise byproducts created by the generative procedure (top).
The filter for speech boosts signal in prominent speech bands, while the filter for bird vocalizations (which are more uniformly-distributed in frequency) simply reduces noise presence.

assistant: text: Learning to synthesize raw waveform audio with GANs