GSA-TTS : Toward Zero-Shot Speech Synthesis based on Gradual Style Adaptor

Jungjun Kim; Seokgi Lee

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 35 references

GSA-TTS : Toward Zero-Shot Speech Synthesis based on Gradual Style Adaptor

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read GSA-TTS claims that slicing a reference audio into ASR-aligned word-level segments, encoding each as a local style, then merging them with self-attention yields zero-shot speech that is more intelligible and speaker-similar than prior…

desk verdict GSA-TTS is a plausible incremental zero-shot TTS paper with a genuinely new ASR-segmented style encoding, but the central claim about word-level local styles rests on unmeasured segmentation accuracy. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19384 v1 pith:XWBRKILE submitted 2025-05-26 cs.CL cs.SDeess.AS

Seokgi Lee , Jungjun Kim This is my paper

classification cs.CLcs.SDeess.AS

keywords text-to-speechzero-shotspeechsynthesisstyleadaptationencoderWhisperASRFastPitchself-attentionprosodycontrollability

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper introduces a style encoder for zero-shot text-to-speech that works gradually: a pre-trained ASR model (Whisper) carves a reference utterance into word-level segments, a local encoder turns each segment into a style vector, and a global encoder combines these vectors with self-attention into a single speaker style condition. The authors claim this hierarchical, semantically aligned encoding lessens content leakage from mismatched reference audio and gives the acoustic model richer prosodic detail. On unseen VCTK speakers, the resulting model reports lower word and character error rates than MetaStyleSpeech and YourTTS, and ablations show the style segmentation and the local encoder are responsible for the gains. The paper also presents evidence that attention over local styles is partially interpretable, with nouns, adjectives, and verbs carrying the most style information.

What carries the argument

The gradual style adaptor (GSA) is the central object: a two-stage style encoder. Stage one, the local style encoder (LSE), consumes ASR-segmented word-level mel-spectrogram chunks and outputs one style vector per chunk using spectral and gated-convolutional processing with multi-head attention and temporal average pooling. Stage two, the global style encoder (GSE), is a small transformer that runs self-attention across the local style vectors, adds a plain average of the local vectors to reinforce speaker identity, and produces a single global style embedding. That embedding is injected into both the encoder and decoder of FastPitch via conditional layer normalization, which is what carries the speaker's identity and prosody into the synthesized speech.

What would settle it

Run GSA-TTS with word boundaries replaced by random slices of the same average length, keeping all other components identical; if WER stays near 1.47% rather than degrading toward the 9.03% ablation value, the semantic alignment of segments is not the driver. A complementary check is to use a forced aligner's word boundaries (or human-annotated ones) and see whether the reported WER and CSMOS change.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a good zero-shot style condition is built from local, word-level style chunks, not from a single global summary of the reference. GSA-TTS advances this by using Whisper's dynamic-time-warped word timestamps to cut the reference mel-spectrogram into style segments, each free of non-speech frames; a local style encoder (spectral processing, gated CNN, and attention pooling, following the Meta-StyleSpeech design) maps each segment to a local style vector. A transformer-style global encoder then runs self-attention over the local styles and averages the result, adding the unweighted mean of local styles as a complementary time-invariant speaker feature. This global embedding conditions a FastPitch backbone through conditional layer normalization. In the paper's tests, GSA-TTS achieves a word error rate of 1.47% on non-parallel style transfer with unseen speakers, compared with 3.98% for MetaStyleSpeech and 8.90% for YourTTS, while maintaining comparable naturalness; the ablation removing style segmentation drops comparative similarity by 1.26 and raises WER to 9.03%, and removing the local encoder raises WER to 8.19%.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on Whisper's word-level timestamps being accurate enough that each segment is a clean, self-contained carrier of a word's speaker style, and on the assumption that removing non-speech frames from the reference improves style transfer in this specific setup.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the claim holds, the ASR-segmentation strategy can be plugged into other TTS backbones as a style encoder, improving zero-shot intelligibility without retraining the acoustic model from scratch.
The reported content-leakage reduction means reference audio with mismatched content is less likely to blur or drop words, making non-parallel style transfer more practical for voice cloning.
The POS attention analysis implies that style weight can be controlled at the word level; in the paper's tests, shifting attention toward adjectives improved intelligibility, suggesting controllable emphasis is achievable.
The ablations directly attribute most of the speaker-similarity gain to the ASR-based segmentation and most of the intelligibility gain to the local style encoder, giving a clear decomposition of where the improvement comes from.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The method's benefit likely scales with ASR timestamp quality; in low-resource languages where Whisper produces noisier alignments, the local styles may degrade, a case the paper does not test.
The finding that content words dominate attention suggests an implicit syntactic-prosody prior; one extension is to condition the global encoder explicitly on part-of-speech tags to make emphasis control more direct than attention weighting.
The same gradual encoding could transfer to other speech generation tasks, such as expressive synthesis or voice conversion, where local style units might be defined by phonemes or syllables instead of words.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The short version: this is a serious, incremental TTS paper that deserves peer review, but the abstract overclaims on naturalness and the key new idea is asserted rather than verified. If you referee it, the thing to push on is Whisper DTW boundary quality, not the overall architecture.

What is actually new: using Whisper word-level timestamps to cut the reference audio into style segments, then feeding those through a local style encoder and a self-attention-based global style encoder, with CLN conditioning. I have not seen that exact combination in the cited literature, and the ablations show it behaves differently from a random-slice (w/o Style Seg.) baseline. The evaluation is genuinely zero-shot on held-out VCTK speakers with external baselines, and the intelligibility jump (WER 1.47% vs 3.98% for MetaStyleSpeech and 8.90% for YourTTS) is large and statistically significant by their tests. That is real evidence, even if the absolute numbers make me want to check their ASR evaluation pipeline.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. First, the segmentation premise is load-bearing: the claim is that Whisper DTW gives clean word-level style segments, but there is no quantitative check of timestamp accuracy on accented VCTK speakers. The paper's only support is an anecdote that segments looked well-structured even when ASR failed, which is not a measurement. If boundaries are noisy, the local styles are contaminated and the attention-weighted global style inherits that noise. This should have been validated, for instance by comparing against forced-alignment or manual boundaries on a small set. Second, Table 2 mixes absolute scores with signed deltas in a way that is genuinely confusing; the reader has to infer what each number means, and that is an editorial problem, not just a style quibble. Third, the MOS/SMOS differences against baselines are not statistically significant, so the 'promising results regarding naturalness' in the abstract goes beyond what the data support. Finally, no code is released, which hurts reproducibility for a paper whose main novelty is a data-processing strategy.

The controllability and POS analysis is suggestive rather than convincing, but it is clearly labeled as exploratory, so I would not hold that against the paper. The citation pattern looks fine: [20] (Intelli-Z) is appropriately cited for the non-speech-frames claim, and the other references are standard. The authors show clear thinking and honest engagement with baselines.

Who is this for? TTS researchers working on zero-shot style transfer, especially those who care about content leakage and prosody control. It is not a paradigm shift, but it is a solid incremental result with a testable idea. I would send it to a serious referee, with a request to verify the segmentation step and clean up the ablation table before acceptance.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes GSA-TTS, a zero-shot text-to-speech system built on FastPitch. Its main novelty is a gradual style adaptor: Whisper is used to segment the reference audio into word-level mel-spectrogram slices (style segments), a local style encoder extracts an embedding per segment, and a global style encoder applies self-attention over these local styles followed by temporal averaging to obtain a global style embedding, which conditions the encoder and decoder through conditional layer normalization. The system is evaluated on held-out VCTK speakers against MetaStyleSpeech and YourTTS, reporting a WER of 1.47% versus 3.98% and 8.90%, improved SECS, and component-wise ablations. A POS-based attention analysis and a case study on the word "bring" are used to support interpretability and controllability claims.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper demonstrates a practical and interpretable way to condition TTS on an arbitrary reference: ASR-derived word-level segmentation gives local style units whose attention weights can be manipulated for prosody control. The held-out-speaker evaluation, external baselines, and component-wise ablations are appropriate, and the intelligibility gain is large and consistent. The main weaknesses are that the central mechanism, Whisper DTW boundary quality, is not validated, and the statistical reporting for the similarity and controllability claims is incomplete. The paper would be substantially strengthened by quantitative boundary-quality evaluation, clearer reporting of the CSMOS protocol, and significance tests for the POS manipulation.

major comments (3)

[§2.1, Table 2] The style segmentation strategy is the load-bearing novelty of the paper, but the DTW word boundaries are not validated. The only supporting evidence is the anecdotal statement that "well-structured segments were exhibited even when ASR failed," with no quantitative evaluation on the accented VCTK test speakers. The "w/o Style Seg." ablation compares ASR segmentation against random 40-frame slicing, so it demonstrates that segmentation helps relative to random slicing but does not establish that the Whisper DTW timestamps are accurate word-level boundaries. Since the local style embeddings and the Section 4.3 POS analysis depend on these boundaries, noisy timestamps would contaminate both the global style and the controllability conclusions. Please add a boundary-quality evaluation on VCTK, for example comparing Whisper DTW timestamps with a forced aligner or with VCTK transcript-level alignments, and an oracle-segmentation ablation. If this is not possible, the claims that local styles correspond to "semantic sound units" and that the POS analysis localizes word-level style should be softened.
[§4.1, Tables 1 and 2] The statistical claim that GSA-TTS significantly outperforms the comparison models in CSMOS cannot be checked, because Table 1 contains no CSMOS column and Table 2 reports CSMOS only as a signed delta with GSA-TTS anchored at 0.00. Moreover, Table 2 mixes signed deltas (MOS, CSMOS) with absolute values (SECS, WER, CER, # Params) without a table note, making the values difficult to interpret. The expression "p<<0.05" is also nonstandard, and no p-values or test details are provided for the Wilcoxon tests. Please report the actual comparative CSMOS values or a clear description of the CSMOS protocol, separate delta and absolute columns, and the p-values and sample sizes for the reported tests.
[§4.3, Table 3] The claim that the adjective POS has "the most significant impact on intelligibility" is not supported by the numbers as presented. The WER change for adjectives is -0.45 ± 0.40 relative to the GSA-TTS baseline of 1.47 ± 0.46, and the changes for nouns (+0.11 ± 0.52) and verbs (-0.1 ± 0.46) are within the reported uncertainty. No significance test is reported for the attention-manipulation conditions. Please add a statistical comparison across the POS conditions, or revise the conclusion to state that the effect is a qualitative tendency rather than a statistically verified one.

minor comments (5)

[§1, §3] There are small language and unit errors: "contributing to more accurate ... representations" appears to have a missing "to" in Section 1, and Section 3 says "22050 kHz" where "22050 Hz" is intended.
[Table 1] The reported ± values for SECS, such as 0.795 ± 0.59, exceed the valid [-1, 1] range for a cosine similarity score; please specify what the ± denotes (standard deviation, standard error, or confidence interval) and correct any values that are inconsistent with that choice.
[§2.1] The statement that well-structured segments were observed even when ASR failed is anecdotal and would benefit from a concrete example or a short quantitative summary of such cases.
[§4.2] The explanation that blurred utterances from the MSE baseline "attribute the increase of SECS" is speculative; a higher SECS with a lower CSMOS could arise from other factors, and the claim should be either tested or presented as a hypothesis.
[References] Reference [13] is cited for "x-vector (TDNN)" in the introduction, but the cited paper is about automated essay scoring; this appears to be the wrong reference for speaker-embedding TDNN/x-vector methods. A standard speaker-embedding reference, such as Snyder et al. (2018), should be added.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims rest on held-out evaluation and external baselines, not on fitted parameters or self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is architectural rather than inferential: Whisper DTW word boundaries define style segments (Section 2.1), a local style encoder produces per-segment embeddings (Section 2.2), and a self-attention global style encoder combines them (Section 2.3). None of these components is defined in terms of the evaluation metrics, and the global style is a weighted average of local embeddings by explicit architecture design, not a quantity fitted to the reported WER/CER results. The evaluations are genuinely zero-shot on excluded VCTK speakers (p261, p225, p294, p347, p238, p234, p248, p335, p245, p326, p302) with external baselines (MetaStyleSpeech, YourTTS) and external metrics (NeMo for WER/CER, Resemblyzer for SECS). The ablation study in Table 2 compares design variants, including the 'w/o Style Seg.' condition that replaces ASR-based segmentation with random slicing, which is a real alternative and not a re-labeling of the proposed method. The only self-citations are background references [3], [4], and [6] in the introduction, and they are not load-bearing for the style-encoding claims. Citation [20] about non-speech frames being redundant is external and used as motivation, not as a substitute for the reported experiments. No equation reduces to a fitted parameter, and no prediction is constructed from the data it claims to predict. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks, so the appropriate finding is no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the reliability of ASR segmentation, the information content of local style vectors, and the aggregating power of self-attention. The ledger lists standard training hyperparameters as free parameters only in the sense of chosen constants; no constants are fitted to make the result emerge. No new physical or external entities are postulated beyond the internal style-segment representation.

free parameters (5)

global style embedding dimension = 384
Set in Section 3; dimension of the GSA output vector that conditions both encoder and decoder via CLN. Chosen by hand, not derived from data.
warmup steps = 4000
Learning-rate schedule from [24], chosen in Section 3. Standard transformer hyperparameter.
training epochs = 150
Training budget on 4 A100s, Section 3; no early stopping or convergence criterion described.
Adam optimizer betas = 0.9, 0.98
Section 3; standard hyperparameters, not fitted to the data.
resample rate = 22050 Hz
Section 3 says '22050 kHz sampling rate' (sic); standard choice for TTS, not tied to the method.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Whisper's DTW word-level timestamps accurately delimit semantic acoustic units.
Section 2.1 uses Whisper cross-attention and DTW to segment reference audio; if timestamps are wrong, local style segments are misaligned and the whole method degrades. The paper's preliminary observation is anecdotal, not a quantitative check.
domain assumption Non-speech frames are redundant for speaker style, so cutting them out yields noise-free, rich style segments.
Section 2.1 relies on [20]; no direct experiment in this paper isolates this claim for the Whisper-based segmentation.
domain assumption Averaging word-level local styles and self-attention contextualization yields a global style sufficient to condition the acoustic model.
Section 2.3 design; supported only by overall ablations, not by an independent characterization of the embedding's content.
domain assumption The selected 11 held-out VCTK speakers and 654 transcripts represent zero-shot conditions.
Section 3; the split is reasonable but there is no analysis of coverage diversity or difficulty.
domain assumption Crowdsourced MOS/SMOS/SECS/WER/CER collected from 20 native speakers are reliable estimates.
Section 4.1; small rater count, no inter-rater agreement or confidence interval width discussion beyond the reported standard errors.

invented entities (1)

Semantic style segment (word-level slice of reference audio from ASR timestamps)
purpose: Acts as the atomic local style unit so the encoder can capture stress, intonation, and identity per word and reduce content leakage.
Introduced in Sections 2.1 and 2.2. It is an internal representational unit, not an externally observable entity; evidence for its usefulness comes only from in-paper ablations (Table 2), with no independent validation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of GSA-TTS : Toward Zero-Shot Speech Synthesis based on Gradual Style Adaptor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XWBRKILE

@misc{pith2026250519384,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: GSA-TTS : Toward Zero-Shot Speech Synthesis based on Gradual Style Adaptor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XWBRKILE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19384}
}

read the original abstract

We present the gradual style adaptor TTS (GSA-TTS) with a novel style encoder that gradually encodes speaking styles from an acoustic reference for zero-shot speech synthesis. GSA first captures the local style of each semantic sound unit. Then the local styles are combined by self-attention to obtain a global style condition. This semantic and hierarchical encoding strategy provides a robust and rich style representation for an acoustic model. We test GSA-TTS on unseen speakers and obtain promising results regarding naturalness, speaker similarity, and intelligibility. Additionally, we explore the potential of GSA in terms of interpretability and controllability, which stems from its hierarchical structure.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

[1]

INTRODUCTION Over the past few years, the domain of Text-to-Speech (TTS) has witnessed dramatic breakthroughs, driven by the advances in deep learning [1, 2, 3, 4]. In parallel, advancements in grapheme-to-phoneme (G2P) conversion has contributed to more accurate and linguistically informed phonetic represen- tations, further improving the quality of for ...

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[2]

We introduce a gradual style encoding method to obtain multi-level style conditions

OUR METHOD We present our proposed model GSA-TTS, which extends upon FastPitch [17] that includes online aligner [18], pitch predictor and duration predictor. We introduce a gradual style encoding method to obtain multi-level style conditions. GSA consists of two components: a local-style encoder (LSE) and a global-style encoder (GSE). In the following se...

work page
[3]

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP We train GSA-TTS using two multi-speaker datasets: LibriTTS- R [27] (2456 speakers) and the VCTK dataset [28] (109 speakers). For testing, we exclude 11 speakers (p261, p225, p294, p347, p238, p234, p248, p335, p245, p326, and p302) and collect 654 unused transcripts from the VCTK dataset for unseen evaluation. We resample the audio to ...

work page
[4]

Ask her to bring these things with her from the store

RESULTS 4.1. Performance We compare the performance of naturalness, voice quality and similarity with comparative models using metrics includ- ing MOS (mean opinion score), SMOS (similarity mean opin- ion score), SECS, WER and CER. To ensure a fair compar- ison, we select open source models as our benchmarks. Our comparative experiment was designed to be ...

work page
[5]

Throughout the experiments, GSA- TTS shows superior audio quality in terms of naturalness, speaker similarity, and intelligibility compared to existing zero-shot models

CONCLUSION This paper introduces a novel gradual style adaptor in zero- shot speech synthesis. Throughout the experiments, GSA- TTS shows superior audio quality in terms of naturalness, speaker similarity, and intelligibility compared to existing zero-shot models. In particular, the use of ASR to split local-style units greatly contributes to the performa...

work page
[6]

Tacotron: Towards end-to-end speech synthesis,

Yuxuan Wang, RJ Skerry-Ryan, Daisy Stanton, Yonghui Wu, Ron J Weiss, Navdeep Jaitly, Zongheng Yang, Ying Xiao, Zhifeng Chen, Samy Bengio, et al., “Tacotron: Towards end-to-end speech synthesis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10135, 2017

arXiv 2017
[7]

Fastspeech: Fast, robust and controllable text to speech,

Yi Ren, Yangjun Ruan, Xu Tan, Tao Qin, Sheng Zhao, Zhou Zhao, and Tie-Yan Liu, “Fastspeech: Fast, robust and controllable text to speech,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019

2019
[8]

Conan: A complementary neighboring-based attention network for referring expression generation,

Jungjun Kim, Hanbin Ko, and Jialin Wu, “Conan: A complementary neighboring-based attention network for referring expression generation,” in Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2020, pp. 1952–1962

work page 2020

Show all 35 references

[9]

Visual question answering based on local-scene-aware referring expression gener- ation,

Jung-Jun Kim, Dong-Gyu Lee, Jialin Wu, Hong-Gyu Jung, and Seong-Whan Lee, “Visual question answering based on local-scene-aware referring expression gener- ation,” Neural Networks, vol. 139, pp. 158–167, 2021

2021
[10]

g2pm: A neu- ral grapheme-to-phoneme conversion package for man- darin chinese based on a new open benchmark dataset,

Kyubyong Park and Seanie Lee, “g2pm: A neu- ral grapheme-to-phoneme conversion package for man- darin chinese based on a new open benchmark dataset,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.03136, 2020

2004 arXiv
[11]

Good neighbors are all you need for chinese grapheme-to-phoneme conversion,

Jungjun Kim, Changjin Han, Gyuhyeon Nam, and Gyeongsu Chae, “Good neighbors are all you need for chinese grapheme-to-phoneme conversion,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acous- tics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

2023
[12]

Sequence-to- sequence neural net models for grapheme-to-phoneme conversion,

Kaisheng Yao and Geoffrey Zweig, “Sequence-to- sequence neural net models for grapheme-to-phoneme conversion,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.00196, 2015

2015 arXiv
[13]

A style- based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks,

Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, and Timo Aila, “A style- based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2019, pp. 4401–4410

2019
[14]

Pvae-tts: adaptive text-to-speech via pro- gressive style adaptation,

Ji-Hyun Lee, Sang-Hoon Lee, Ji-Hoon Kim, and Seong- Whan Lee, “Pvae-tts: adaptive text-to-speech via pro- gressive style adaptation,” in ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Sig- nal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 6312–6316

2022
[15]

Hiervst: Hierarchical adap- tive zero-shot voice style transfer,

Sang-Hoon Lee, Ha-Yeong Choi, Hyung-Seok Oh, and Seong-Whan Lee, “Hiervst: Hierarchical adap- tive zero-shot voice style transfer,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.16171, 2023

2023 arXiv
[16]

Zero-shot multi-speaker text-to-speech with state- of-the-art neural speaker embeddings,

Erica Cooper, Cheng-I Lai, Yusuke Yasuda, Fuming Fang, Xin Wang, Nanxin Chen, and Junichi Yamag- ishi, “Zero-shot multi-speaker text-to-speech with state- of-the-art neural speaker embeddings,” in ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE International Conference on Acous- tics, Speech and Signal...

2020
[17]

Style tokens: Unsuper- vised style modeling, control and transfer in end-to-end speech synthesis,

Yuxuan Wang, Daisy Stanton, Yu Zhang, RJ-Skerry Ryan, Eric Battenberg, Joel Shor, Ying Xiao, Ye Jia, Fei Ren, and Rif A Saurous, “Style tokens: Unsuper- vised style modeling, control and transfer in end-to-end speech synthesis,” in International conference on ma- chine learnin...

2018
[18]

Tdnn: a two-stage deep neural network for prompt-independent automated essay scoring,

Cancan Jin, Ben He, Kai Hui, and Le Sun, “Tdnn: a two-stage deep neural network for prompt-independent automated essay scoring,” in Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (V olume 1: Long Papers) , 2018, pp. 1088– 1097

2018
[19]

Information sieve: Content leakage reduction in end-to-end prosody transfer for expressive speech synthesis.,

Xudong Dai, Cheng Gong, Longbiao Wang, and Kaili Zhang, “Information sieve: Content leakage reduction in end-to-end prosody transfer for expressive speech synthesis.,” in Interspeech, 2021, pp. 131–135

2021
[21]

Crossspeech: Speaker- independent acoustic representation for cross-lingual speech synthesis,

Ji-Hoon Kim, Hong-Sun Yang, Yoon-Cheol Ju, Il-Hwan Kim, and Byeong-Yeol Kim, “Crossspeech: Speaker- independent acoustic representation for cross-lingual speech synthesis,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)....

2023
[22]

Fastpitch: Parallel text-to-speech with pitch prediction,

Adrian Ła ´ncucki, “Fastpitch: Parallel text-to-speech with pitch prediction,” in ICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2021, pp. 6588–6592

2021
[23]

One tts align- ment to rule them all,

Rohan Badlani, Adrian Ła ´ncucki, Kevin J Shih, Rafael Valle, Wei Ping, and Bryan Catanzaro, “One tts align- ment to rule them all,” in ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 6092–6096

2022
[24]

Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,

Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Tao Xu, Greg Brock- man, Christine McLeavey, and Ilya Sutskever, “Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2023, pp. 28492–28518

2023
[25]

Intelli-z: Toward intelligible zero-shot tts,

Sunghee Jung, Won Jang, Jaesam Yoon, and Bongwan Kim, “Intelli-z: Toward intelligible zero-shot tts,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.13921, 2024

2024 arXiv
[26]

Meta-stylespeech: Multi-speaker adaptive text-to-speech generation,

Dongchan Min, Dong Bok Lee, Eunho Yang, and Sung Ju Hwang, “Meta-stylespeech: Multi-speaker adaptive text-to-speech generation,” in International Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 2021, pp. 7748–7759

2021
[27]

Language modeling with gated convolu- tional networks,

Yann N Dauphin, Angela Fan, Michael Auli, and David Grangier, “Language modeling with gated convolu- tional networks,” in International conference on ma- chine learning. PMLR, 2017, pp. 933–941

2017
[28]

Are transformers universal approximators of sequence-to-sequence func- tions?,

Chulhee Yun, Srinadh Bhojanapalli, Ankit Singh Rawat, Sashank J Reddi, and Sanjiv Kumar, “Are transformers universal approximators of sequence-to-sequence func- tions?,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.10077, 2019

1912 arXiv
[29]

Attention is all you need,

Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Ad- vances in neural information processing systems , vol. 30, 2017

2017
[30]

Adaspeech: Adap- tive text to speech for custom voice,

Mingjian Chen, Xu Tan, Bohan Li, Yanqing Liu, Tao Qin, Sheng Zhao, and Tie-Yan Liu, “Adaspeech: Adap- tive text to speech for custom voice,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.00993, 2021

2021 arXiv
[31]

Layer normalization,

Jimmy Lei Ba, Jamie Ryan Kiros, and Geoffrey E Hinton, “Layer normalization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.06450, 2016

2016 arXiv
[32]

Libritts-r: A restored multi-speaker text-to-speech corpus,

Yuma Koizumi, Heiga Zen, Shigeki Karita, Yifan Ding, Kohei Yatabe, Nobuyuki Morioka, Michiel Bacchiani, Yu Zhang, Wei Han, and Ankur Bapna, “Libritts-r: A restored multi-speaker text-to-speech corpus,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18802, 2023

2023 arXiv
[33]

Superseded-cstr vctk corpus: English multi- speaker corpus for cstr voice cloning toolkit,

Christophe Veaux, Junichi Yamagishi, Kirsten MacDon- ald, et al., “Superseded-cstr vctk corpus: English multi- speaker corpus for cstr voice cloning toolkit,” 2016

2016
[34]

Real-time voice cloning,

Corentin Jemine et al., “Real-time voice cloning,” 2019

2019
[35]

Generspeech: Towards style transfer for generalizable out-of-domain text-to-speech,

Rongjie Huang, Yi Ren, Jinglin Liu, Chenye Cui, and Zhou Zhao, “Generspeech: Towards style transfer for generalizable out-of-domain text-to-speech,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 35, pp. 10970–10983, 2022

2022
[36]

Hifi- gan: Generative adversarial networks for efficient and high fidelity speech synthesis,

Jungil Kong, Jaehyeon Kim, and Jaekyoung Bae, “Hifi- gan: Generative adversarial networks for efficient and high fidelity speech synthesis,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 33, pp. 17022– 17033, 2020

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

INTRODUCTION Over the past few years, the domain of Text-to-Speech (TTS) has witnessed dramatic breakthroughs, driven by the advances in deep learning [1, 2, 3, 4]. In parallel, advancements in grapheme-to-phoneme (G2P) conversion has contributed to more accurate and linguistically informed phonetic represen- tations, further improving the quality of for ...

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[2] [2]

We introduce a gradual style encoding method to obtain multi-level style conditions

OUR METHOD We present our proposed model GSA-TTS, which extends upon FastPitch [17] that includes online aligner [18], pitch predictor and duration predictor. We introduce a gradual style encoding method to obtain multi-level style conditions. GSA consists of two components: a local-style encoder (LSE) and a global-style encoder (GSE). In the following se...

work page

[3] [3]

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP We train GSA-TTS using two multi-speaker datasets: LibriTTS- R [27] (2456 speakers) and the VCTK dataset [28] (109 speakers). For testing, we exclude 11 speakers (p261, p225, p294, p347, p238, p234, p248, p335, p245, p326, and p302) and collect 654 unused transcripts from the VCTK dataset for unseen evaluation. We resample the audio to ...

work page

[4] [4]

Ask her to bring these things with her from the store

RESULTS 4.1. Performance We compare the performance of naturalness, voice quality and similarity with comparative models using metrics includ- ing MOS (mean opinion score), SMOS (similarity mean opin- ion score), SECS, WER and CER. To ensure a fair compar- ison, we select open source models as our benchmarks. Our comparative experiment was designed to be ...

work page

[5] [5]

Throughout the experiments, GSA- TTS shows superior audio quality in terms of naturalness, speaker similarity, and intelligibility compared to existing zero-shot models

CONCLUSION This paper introduces a novel gradual style adaptor in zero- shot speech synthesis. Throughout the experiments, GSA- TTS shows superior audio quality in terms of naturalness, speaker similarity, and intelligibility compared to existing zero-shot models. In particular, the use of ASR to split local-style units greatly contributes to the performa...

work page

[6] [6]

Tacotron: Towards end-to-end speech synthesis,

Yuxuan Wang, RJ Skerry-Ryan, Daisy Stanton, Yonghui Wu, Ron J Weiss, Navdeep Jaitly, Zongheng Yang, Ying Xiao, Zhifeng Chen, Samy Bengio, et al., “Tacotron: Towards end-to-end speech synthesis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10135, 2017

arXiv 2017

[7] [7]

Fastspeech: Fast, robust and controllable text to speech,

Yi Ren, Yangjun Ruan, Xu Tan, Tao Qin, Sheng Zhao, Zhou Zhao, and Tie-Yan Liu, “Fastspeech: Fast, robust and controllable text to speech,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019

2019

[8] [8]

Conan: A complementary neighboring-based attention network for referring expression generation,

Jungjun Kim, Hanbin Ko, and Jialin Wu, “Conan: A complementary neighboring-based attention network for referring expression generation,” in Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2020, pp. 1952–1962

work page 2020