Source-linked AI summary

VisemeNet: Audio-Driven Animator-Centric Speech Animation

Yang Zhou, Zhan Xu, Chris Landreth, Evangelos Kalogerakis, Subhransu Maji, Karan Singh

arXiv:1805.09488v1cs.GR

TL;DR

The paper addresses the challenge of producing editable, animator-centric speech animation directly from audio without language-specific transcripts. It proposes a three-stage LSTM pipeline that predicts phoneme groups, landmarks, and JALI motion curves, achieving near-real-time audio-driven animation and reported robustness across speakers and languages. The method is limited to controlling the lower face in its current implementation.

  • Problem

    Existing speech-animation workflows and transcript-based systems limit editability, language independence, or animator-centric control.

  • Method

    A three-stage LSTM network predicts phoneme groups and facial landmarks from audio, then combines them with audio features to produce JALI viseme motion curves.

  • Results

    The architecture produces animator-centric speech animation directly from audio with near-real-time performance at 120ms lag and supports diverse speakers and languages.

  • Takeaways & Limitations

    Jointly optimized intermediate phoneme-group and landmark stages support a compact, animator-editable audio-to-animation pipeline.

  • Takeaways & Limitations

    The current implementation controls only the lower part of the face; extending control to the upper face is future work.

Abstract

from arXiv · show

We present a novel deep-learning based approach to producing animator-centric speech motion curves that drive a JALI or standard FACS-based production face-rig, directly from input audio. Our three-stage Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network architecture is motivated by psycho-linguistic insights: segmenting speech audio into a stream of phonetic-groups is sufficient for viseme construction; speech styles like mumbling or shouting are strongly co-related to the motion of facial landmarks; and animator style is encoded in viseme motion curve profiles. Our contribution is an automatic real-time lip-synchronization from audio solution that integrates seamlessly into existing animation pipelines. We evaluate our results by: cross-validation to ground-truth data; animator critique and edits; visual comparison to recent deep-learning lip-synchronization solutions; and showing our approach to be resilient to diversity in speaker and language.

1 INTRODUCTION

Realistic speech animation is important but difficult to produce with existing workflows: keyframing is expressive yet laborious, while performance capture is difficult to edit. VisemeNet addresses this gap with a three-stage audio-to-animation network designed for animator-centric, near-real-time and language-agnostic speech animation.

  • Realistic facial animation matters across entertainment, medicine, education, and assistants because subtle flaws can undermine audience trust and empathy.
  • Keyframing is expressive and editable but laborious, whereas performance capture is easier to record yet difficult to edit or refine.
  • Transcript-based pipelines add complexity and language dependence, while audio-only approaches can avoid phonetic transcripts.
  • The proposed network predicts phoneme groups, facial landmarks, then JALI parameters and sparse speech motion curves from audio.
  • The system targets animator-centric speech animation directly from audio with near-real-time performance at 120ms lag.

2 RELATED WORK

Prior speech-animation methods trade off editability, realism, language dependence, or compatibility with animator workflows. VisemeNet instead maps audio through intermediate phoneme-group and landmark representations to sparse, compact animator-centric motion curves in a jointly optimized pipeline.

  • Procedural: Procedural animation maps phonemes to visemes but must handle contextual mappings, co-articulation, and viseme motion profiles.
  • Performance-capture: Performance-capture transfers recorded facial motion effectively, but the resulting animation is not inherently animator-centric or easily editable.
  • Data-driven: Data-driven methods stitch facial-animation examples from corpora, limiting scope to available data and producing non-animator-centric output.
  • Deep learning-based speech animation: Transcript-based deep-learning methods introduce language dependence and output face-space representations rather than compact animator-centric viseme curves.
  • Deep learning-based speech animation: Audio-to-mesh methods avoid transcripts but produce outputs poorly suited to current animation practice and animator-centric editing.
  • VisemeNet: The proposed pipeline jointly optimizes all stages, avoiding independently fitted rig predictions that can break perceptual constraints.

3 ALGORITHM DESIGN

VisemeNet combines psycho-linguistic structure with LSTM-based prediction to convert audio into compact JALI speech controls. It uses phoneme groups, facial landmarks, audiovisual transfer learning, and multi-task training to support style-aware animator-editable animation.

  • The system targets high-quality, animator-editable, style-aware, language-agnostic, real-time speech animation from audio.
  • Its architecture predicts sparse viseme values together with jaw and lip parameters over time for FACS-like face rigs.
  • Phoneme group prediction: The phoneme-group stage recognizes 20 visually relevant IPA groups from audio without text or a phonetic transcript.
  • Speech style prediction: The landmark stage captures speech-style cues because jaw and lip parameters correlate strongly with jaw and lip landmark motion.
  • Viseme prediction: The viseme stage combines phoneme groups, landmarks, and audio to predict JALI-based viseme representations using multimodal speech data.
  • Transfer learning from audiovisual datasets: Audiovisual corpora provide landmarks and aligned transcripts that support transfer learning despite lacking facial rig parameters.
  • Multi-task learning jointly trains phoneme-group, landmark, viseme, and rig-parameter objectives, which the authors found important for high performance.
  • LSTMs provide memory for representing speech context needed to capture co-articulation from audio.

4 NETWORK ARCHITECTURE

The network converts audio into animator-centric JALI rig outputs through staged phoneme-group, landmark, and viseme processing. LSTM-based stages use temporal audio context and intermediate representations to predict sparse, style-sensitive facial controls.

  • 4 NETWORK ARCHITECTURE: The architecture first processes audio through phoneme-group and landmark stages, then combines their predictions with audio features for viseme prediction.The final stage outputs JALI-based rig parameters and controls that animate the face.
  • Phoneme group stage: The phoneme-group stage uses a temporal audio window to predict phoneme-group probabilities, introducing a 120 ms real-time lag.The window includes past and future frames, while feature extraction and network inference take about 1 ms per frame.
  • 4 NETWORK ARCHITECTURE: Three layers of unidirectional LSTM units hierarchically update 256-dimensional memory states from frame-level audio features.The architecture uses recurrent memory to represent temporal audio information.
  • Landmark stage: The landmark stage predicts 38 sparse 2D jaw, lip, and nose landmarks from the same 1560-dimensional frame feature vector.The landmarks approximate an average face rather than the morphology of a particular face.

6 EVALUATION

The evaluation uses BIWI to compare the proposed method and alternatives under neutral and expressive speech conditions. Artist-provided JALI motion curves provide ground truth, while leave-one-speaker-out evaluation addresses the dataset’s limited speaker count.

  • Evaluation: The study evaluates the proposed method and alternatives quantitatively and qualitatively, focusing the section primarily on quantitative results.Qualitative results and comparisons are referred to in the accompanying video.
  • Methodology: BIWI provides artist-generated JALI motion curves for comparing predicted rig parameters with ground truth.The dataset includes neutral and expressive renditions, including anger, sadness, fear, nervousness, and excitement.
  • Methodology: Leave-one-out evaluation holds out each of BIWI’s 14 speakers, pre-trains on the remaining audiovisual data, and jointly trains on the other 13 annotated speakers.This protocol is used because the JALI-annotated dataset contains only 14 speakers.

14 training

The evaluation compares the full architecture with degraded alternatives using activation and motion-curve measures across neutral and expressive speech. Tests use speaker-independent splits and assess whether intermediate stages and recurrent modeling improve performance.

  • Evaluation setup: Test splits always use speakers not observed during training to assess speaker-independent generalization.The authors consider this more practically useful than training and testing on the same speaker.
  • Evaluation measures: Precision measures correct predicted rig activations among predicted activations, while recall measures correct activations among ground-truth activations.Both measures are ideal at 100%.
  • Evaluation measures: Motion-curve differences measure absolute discrepancies in active viseme, co-articulation, and JALI parameters, with inactive parameters excluded because the curves are sparse.Normalized parameter differences can be interpreted as percentages.
  • Results: The full method achieves the best performance across all evaluation measures and both neutral and expressive speech styles.The comparison reports precision, recall, and motion-curve differences averaged over all test splits.
  • Ablations: Removing the phoneme-group or landmark stages causes large or noticeable performance drops, showing that both intermediate representations contribute to viseme prediction.The phoneme-group stage is described as crucial for predicting correct visemes.
  • Ablations: Replacing LSTMs with fully connected sliding-window modules causes a large performance drop.The alternative architectures were trained with corresponding losses, matched training sets, hyper-parameter tuning, and test splits.
  • Comparison limits: Quantitative comparison with prior methods is unavailable because their test rigs are not FACS-enabled and their implementations are not public.The paper instead provides qualitative comparisons with previous works.

7 CONCLUSION

The paper presents an animator-centric deep-learning system that maps audio to speech motion curves. It identifies broader extensions, including learned audio features, a discriminator, and control of the upper face.

  • Conclusion: The approach maps audio to speech motion curves for animator-centric facial animation.The stated future directions build on this lower-face animation system.
  • Future work: The current implementation uses hand-engineered audio features, which the authors propose replacing with learned features to improve performance.The proposed change is presented as future work rather than a demonstrated result.
  • Limitations: The method currently controls only the lower face; learning upper-face control, such as eye movement, without explicit supervision is proposed as future work.This is the paper's clearest scope boundary.
  • Future work: The authors suggest discriminator-based quality assessment as another way to boost the viseme generator's performance.They connect this proposal to cGAN-based approaches for image and shape synthesis.
  • Implications: The authors argue that combining animator-centric techniques with deep learning could leave animators more time for creative and nuanced character expression.They frame this as potential impact on facial animation practice in film and game studios.
Loading 1805.09488v1…