Evaluates the robustness of audio spoof detection models against real-world audio degradation and manipulation attacks (laundering), including reverberation, additive noise, and re-compression. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ASVspoof 2019 LA, ASVspoof Laundered Database, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports EER.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Audio Spoof Detection Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-audio-spoof-detection-eval)
---
name: audio-spoof-detection-eval
description: Evaluates the robustness of audio spoof detection models against real-world audio degradation and manipulation attacks (laundering), including reverberation, additive noise, and re-compression. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ASVspoof 2019 LA, ASVspoof Laundered Database, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports EER.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2408.14712
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# audio-spoof-detection-eval
> Is Audio Spoof Detection Robust to Laundering Attacks? — Hashim Ali et al. (arXiv:2408.14712, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the robustness of audio spoof detection models against real-world audio degradation and manipulation attacks (laundering), including reverberation, additive noise, and re-compression.
## Datasets
- **ASVspoof 2019 LA** — total ?; splits: train (-1), development (-1), eval (-1)
- **ASVspoof Laundered Database** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `EER` **(primary)** — range: percent
- EER is the operating point where the miss rate ($P_{miss}$) and false alarm rate ($P_{fa}$) are equal.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Audio utterances (bonafide or spoof)
**Output**: Binary classification decision or spoof confidence score
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_eer(predictions, labels):
thresholds = np.linspace(0, 1, 1000)
miss_rates, fa_rates = [], []
for t in thresholds:
pred = (predictions >= t).astype(int)
miss_rates.append(np.mean(pred[labels == 0]))
fa_rates.append(np.mean(pred[labels == 1]))
eer = np.interp(0.5, [(m + f) / 2 for m, f in zip(miss_rates, fa_rates)], [0, 1])
return eer
```
## Common pitfalls
- Training models on laundered/corrupted data instead of clean ASVspoof 2019 LA train data
- Using min-tDCF without the required false alarm and miss cost parameters
- Aggregating results across all laundering attacks without reporting per-attack degradation
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Following the ASVspoof challenge evaluation plans, the equal error rate (EER) is used as an objective evaluation metric in our experiments [25]. We omit the tandem detection cost function (mint-DCF) as it requires the false alarm and miss costs of the ASV system, which are only available for ASVspoof 2019 eval database. EER corresponds to a CM operating point at which miss rate $(P_{miss})$ and False alarm rate $(P_{fa})$ becomes equal.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{ali2024audiospoof,
title={Is Audio Spoof Detection Robust to Laundering Attacks?},
author={Hashim Ali et al.},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2408.14712}
}
```
- arXiv: 2408.14712