Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Using Rater and System Metadata to Explain Variance in the VoiceMOS Challenge 2022 Dataset

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2209.06358 v1 pith:EX6FSBHD submitted 2022-09-14 cs.SD cs.LGeess.AS

Using Rater and System Metadata to Explain Variance in the VoiceMOS Challenge 2022 Dataset

classification cs.SD cs.LGeess.AS
keywords metadatametricsdatasetqualityspeechsystemsystem-leveltest
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Non-reference speech quality models are important for a growing number of applications. The VoiceMOS 2022 challenge provided a dataset of synthetic voice conversion and text-to-speech samples with subjective labels. This study looks at the amount of variance that can be explained in subjective ratings of speech quality from metadata and the distribution imbalances of the dataset. Speech quality models were constructed using wav2vec 2.0 with additional metadata features that included rater groups and system identifiers and obtained competitive metrics including a Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SRCC) of 0.934 and MSE of 0.088 at the system-level, and 0.877 and 0.198 at the utterance-level. Using data and metadata that the test restricted or blinded further improved the metrics. A metadata analysis showed that the system-level metrics do not represent the model's system-level prediction as a result of the wide variation in the number of utterances used for each system on the validation and test datasets. We conclude that, in general, conditions should have enough utterances in the test set to bound the sample mean error, and be relatively balanced in utterance count between systems, otherwise the utterance-level metrics may be more reliable and interpretable.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.