Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Towards Emotionally Consistent Text-Based Speech Editing: Introducing EmoCorrector and The ECD-TSE Dataset

T0 review · 5 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 By retrieving speech samples that match the edited text's emotion and re-synthesizing the utterance, EmoCorrector raises text-speech emotion matching accuracy from about 7% to 48% across four TSE baselines.

desk verdict The task framing and dataset are the real contribution; the evaluation chain is weakened by unverified emotion labels and a self-referential objective metric, so the paper needs revision before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.20341 v1 pith:QBD2KB2V submitted 2025-05-24 eess.AS cs.AIcs.CLcs.SD

Rui Liu , Pu Gao , Jiatian Xi , Berrak Sisman , Carlos Busso , Haizhou Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.AScs.AIcs.CLcs.SD
keywords text-basedspeecheditingemotionalconsistencyEmoCorrectorECD-TSEretrieval-augmentedgenerationcross-modalemotionretrievalspeaker-emotiondisentanglementcontrastivelearning
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

Text-based speech editing (TSE) rewrites a recording by editing its transcript, but current models often preserve the original acoustic segment while changing words, so the re-synthesized sentence can carry the wrong emotion. This paper introduces EmoCorrector, a three-stage post-correction pipeline that learns a joint text-speech emotion space via contrastive pretraining, disentangles speaker identity from emotion, and re-synthesizes the edited speech conditioned on the emotion retrieved from that joint space. To train and evaluate it, the authors build ECD-TSE, a dataset of 84,000 synthetic emotional utterances derived from 7,000 texts, each with one- or two-word variants meant to flip the sentence's emotion. They report that EmoCorrector raises text-speech emotion matching accuracy from about 7.2% to 48% on average across four TSE baselines, improves subjective matching scores by 0.73 points, and increases emotional cosine similarity to ground-truth emotion by 0.18-0.26. If correct, the work establishes that emotional consistency can be repaired as a separate post-processing stage rather than built into every TSE model from scratch.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is EmoCLAP, an emotional contrastive language-audio pretraining step that projects text and speech into a shared emotion embedding space, plus a gradient-reversal adversarial disentanglement module that strips speaker information from the emotion embedding and emotion information from the speaker embedding. At correction time, the edited text's emotion embedding is used as a query to retrieve the Top-K (K=5) closest speech emotion embeddings; their average, refined by an adaptor, is added to the speaker embedding and fed through a GenerSpeech-style TTS decoder with a HiFiGAN vocoder. The retrieval database and the disentanglement pretraining are what allow the system to separate what emotion to say from whose voice says it.

What would settle it

Have human listeners read each of the 7,000 ECD-TSE texts and choose the conveyed emotion; if agreement with the assigned ChatGPT-4 labels is near chance for any emotion pair, the dataset's labels and every result built on them collapse.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that emotion inconsistency in TSE is a fixable post-hoc problem: given an edited text and the speaker embedding of the edited speech, one can retrieve speech samples whose emotion matches the text, aggregate their emotion embeddings, and inject the result into a TTS backbone so the output speech expresses the intended emotion while keeping the speaker's voice. The key evidence is that this post-correction works across four different TSE models (EditSpeech, A3T, FluentSpeech, and VoiceCraft), improving TSE-MOS, TSEAcc, and ECS on the new ECD-TSE benchmark relative to both the uncorrected outputs and direct emotional voice conversion baselines.

Load-bearing premise

The training and evaluation rest on the unverified assumption that ChatGPT-4's one- or two-word text edits reliably switch the emotion conveyed by a sentence, and that synthetic TTS audio preserves that emotion for human listeners.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Emotion post-correction can be layered onto existing TSE models without changing them, converting their edited output into emotionally consistent speech.
  • The ECD-TSE benchmark supplies 84,000 synthetic text-speech pairs with one- or two-word emotional variants, giving the field a standardized training and evaluation resource for emotional consistency.
  • Retrieving K=5 emotion references works best; K=3 provides too little information and K=10 adds redundancy, so retrieval granularity materially affects emotion transfer.
  • Corrected speech keeps its energy and MFCC similarity near 1, indicating that the emotion fix does not degrade overall acoustic quality.
  • The retrieval-based post-correction also outperforms direct emotional voice conversion with Cycle-GAN and VAW-GAN, suggesting that conditioning on matched emotion exemplars is more controllable than conversion.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension the paper leaves implicit: the same post-correction module should transfer to TSE systems beyond the four evaluated, since it operates on the edited text and edited speech alone.
  • Because ECD-TSE is entirely synthetic, a key open question is whether the improvements survive on real human emotional speech, where emotion cues are subtler and speaker variation is wider.
  • The paper's numbers all rest on ChatGPT-4-generated emotion labels; a human perceptual study of the text variants would either validate or undermine the benchmark, regardless of the model's internal consistency.
  • The five-class emotion setup could be extended to dimensional emotion (valence-arousal) via the same retrieval mechanism, which might enable finer-grained emotional control than discrete categories.
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.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper addresses emotional consistency in text-based speech editing. It introduces EmoCorrector, a three-stage post-correction pipeline: (1) EmoCLAP contrastive pretraining builds a shared text-speech emotion space and a cross-modal retrieval database; (2) speaker-emotion disentanglement pretraining separates emotion and speaker representations; (3) an emotion post-correction module retrieves top-K emotion-matched speech embeddings and injects them into a TTS synthesizer while preserving speaker identity. To train and evaluate the method, the authors construct ECD-TSE, a synthetic dataset with about 84,000 utterances generated from 7,000 ChatGPT-4-produced text variants and three TTS engines. Experiments on four TSE baselines report consistent gains after EmoCorrector: average TSE-MOS improves by 0.73, TSEAcc improves from about 7.2% to 48%, and ECS improves by 0.18-0.26.

Significance. If the results hold up, this is a useful first benchmark and method for emotion-consistent text-based speech editing, a gap that existing TSE systems indeed overlook. The strengths of the paper are its clear problem formulation, the construction of paired text-speech data with minimal lexical changes across emotions, consistent before/after improvements over four TSE baselines, and the public release of code and audio examples. However, the central evidence is currently weakened by three issues: the ECD-TSE text emotion labels have no human validation, the headline objective metric ECS is computed with emotion2vec, which is the same backbone used by the method, and the contrastive loss equation is incomplete. With independent human evaluation of labels and output emotion, and with non-circular objective metrics, this would be a solid contribution to the field.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1] The contrastive loss expression Lclap = -log exp(B)/Σ_k exp(B) is mathematically incomplete. B is defined as the full scaled similarity matrix µ(M_s · M_t^T), not a per-sample logit vector, so the equation lacks a positive-pair index, a sum over batch elements, and a proper softmax denominator. As written, it cannot be implemented, and since EmoCLAP is the foundation of the retrieval database and of the emotion embedding used throughout the pipeline, the exact batch-wise formulation should be stated.
  2. [Section 4.2, Table 3] The ECS metric is circular for this method: ECS extracts emotional features from corrected and ground-truth speech with emotion2vec, and emotion2vec is also the backbone of the EmoCLAP speech encoder that builds the retrieval database and provides the emotion embedding injected into the synthesizer. The reported ECS gains therefore partially measure proximity in the same representation space the model was optimized to match, rather than independent perceptual quality. I recommend reporting ECS with an independent emotion recognition front-end and, ideally, correlating ECS with the human TSE-MOS results.
  3. [Section 2, Table 3] The emotion labels of ECD-TSE are generated by ChatGPT-4 through one- or two-word edits, with no human annotation or perceptual validation of the modified texts or of the synthesized ground-truth speech. This is load-bearing because these labels supervise EmoCLAP, define retrieval targets, and serve as ground truth for TSEAcc. The Ground Truth row in Table 3 reports only 52.1% TSEAcc, meaning Qwen2-Audio disagrees with the text label on nearly half of the utterances that are supposed to be ground truth. The paper should add human labeling of the texts and of a sample of ground-truth audio, report inter-annotator agreement, and discuss how label noise affects the headline improvement from about 7.2% to 48%.
  4. [Section 4.2] TSEAcc relies entirely on Qwen2-Audio as the emotion recognizer, with no validation of its agreement with human perception on the ECD-TSE corpus. Since TSEAcc is the main quantitative evidence for emotion matching and is also used for the K-selection analysis in Table 4, I recommend reporting its correlation with human TSE-MOS or computing it with multiple speech emotion recognition models to ensure the result is not an artifact of a single automatic evaluator.
  5. [Section 4.5] The comparison with Cycle-GAN and VAE-GAN emotional voice conversion is not reported numerically in the manuscript; the text refers to results posted on the demo website. The claim that EmoCorrector has an advantage over EVC is therefore unverifiable from the paper, and the table should either be included in the manuscript or the claim should be removed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1] The sentence 'with µ set to 10 steps' is garbled: µ is a scaling factor, not a number of steps. Please clarify whether µ=10 and describe how this value was chosen.
  2. [Table 3] The Ground Truth row reports 'NA' for the before-correction columns; please clarify why ground-truth speech is not applicable to the before/after comparison and present the row consistently with the other methods.
  3. [Section 4.4] The TSE-MOS section states that 25 listeners rated 50 audio samples; please provide the number of ratings per sample, the listener population, and whether listeners were native English speakers, so the subjective result can be interpreted.
  4. [Section 4.5] The overall-quality and EVC analyses are based on 50 randomly selected test samples; please specify the random seed and report confidence intervals or significance tests for the Energy and MFCC similarity values.
  5. [Abstract and Section 2] The abstract and contribution list describe ECD-TSE as a dataset contribution, but no release URL for the full dataset is provided, only code and audio examples; a distribution plan for the dataset should be stated.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

ECS objective evidence is circular: the evaluation metric and the method's conditioning share the same emotion2vec feature space.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.2 (ECS metric) and Sections 3.1/3.3 (method uses emotion2vec)]
    "Emotional Cosine Similarity (ECS) adopts emotion2vec [22] to extract the emotional features of the audio before and after correction and compute the cosine similarity between these features and the Ground Truth emotional features. ... the Speech Encoder (built on emotion2vec [22]) extracts emotional speech features S. ... SK are aggregated by averaging them and processed by a pre-trained Adaptor from Block 2 to generate the refined speech emotion embedding He."

    The ECS metric measures cosine similarity in emotion2vec space between corrected speech and ground-truth speech. The method is constructed in that same space: the EmoCLAP Speech Encoder is built on emotion2vec, the retrieval database stores emotion2vec-based embeddings, and the conditioning vector He injected into the synthesizer is derived from retrieved emotion2vec embeddings. Therefore, the reported ECS improvements (e.g., 0.79 to 0.97) largely reflect the model reproducing the feature space it was designed to copy; the metric is not an independent measure of perceived emotional consistency. The human TSE-MOS and Qwen2-Audio TSEAcc results provide independent support, so the circularity is partial, affecting only ECS as objective evidence.

full rationale

The central claim that EmoCorrector enhances emotional consistency is supported by three metrics. The human TSE-MOS and the Qwen2-Audio-based TSEAcc are independent of the method's feature choices, so the paper does not reduce entirely to a closed loop. However, the ECS metric is not independent: it uses emotion2vec, the same representation that underpins EmoCLAP's speech encoder and the retrieval database that provides the conditioning vector He. Because the corrected speech is generated with He derived from emotion2vec embeddings, and ECS measures cosine similarity in that same emotion2vec space, the ECS gains are largely a consequence of the method's construction rather than independent evidence of emotional fidelity. A further validity concern, though not a circularity, is that the ECD-TSE text-emotion labels are generated by ChatGPT-4 with one- or two-word edits and no human perceptual verification; the low ground-truth TSEAcc (52.1%) suggests the automatic evaluator and the text labels disagree on nearly half the utterances. This reinforces caution in interpreting the headline improvements, but the core derivation of the model itself is not circular. Score 6 reflects the partial circularity of the ECS evidence while acknowledging the independent subjective and LLM-based metrics.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework introduces no new physical or conceptual entities. The load-bearing assumptions are about label validity, synthetic speech as a proxy for natural speech, and the linear additivity of emotion and speaker embeddings.

free parameters (2)
  • Retrieval size K = 5 (best among {3,5,10} in Table 4)
    K is optimized on the test set; larger K=10 reduces TSEAcc. This is a hyperparameter selected by the reported evaluation, not derived from theory.
  • Contrastive scaling factor mu = 10
    The scaling factor in the EmoCLAP contrastive objective is set to 10 with no sensitivity analysis or theoretical justification (Section 3.1, Section 4.1).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption ChatGPT-4 text modifications produce valid discrete emotion labels for each sentence.
    Dataset emotion labels are the prompt-specified targets, with no human verification that the modified texts actually convey the intended emotion to listeners (Section 2).
  • domain assumption Synthetic emotional speech generated by Azure, CosyVoice2, and F5-TTS is a valid proxy for natural human emotional speech in evaluating TSE emotion consistency.
    All 84,000 clips are machine-synthesized; the paper never validates against recordings of human speakers, so results may not transfer to natural edited speech (Section 2).
  • domain assumption Emotion2vec embeddings can be averaged over Top-K retrieved samples and added to a speaker embedding to control emotion in synthesis.
    The retrieval aggregator averages Top-K emotion embeddings and directly adds them to speaker embedding (Section 3.3); linear additivity of emotion and speaker spaces is presumed.
  • standard math The standard CLIP contrastive loss is correctly applied; the printed one-pair form is a shorthand.
    Equation for Lclap in Section 3.1 is written for a single positive pair; the batch-level normalization is omitted, so as written it is incomplete mathematically.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards Emotionally Consistent Text-Based Speech Editing: Introducing EmoCorrector and The ECD-TSE Dataset." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QBD2KB2V

@misc{pith2026250520341,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards Emotionally Consistent Text-Based Speech Editing: Introducing EmoCorrector and The ECD-TSE Dataset},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QBD2KB2V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.20341}
}
abstract

Text-based speech editing (TSE) modifies speech using only text, eliminating re-recording. However, existing TSE methods, mainly focus on the content accuracy and acoustic consistency of synthetic speech segments, and often overlook the emotional shifts or inconsistency issues introduced by text changes. To address this issue, we propose EmoCorrector, a novel post-correction scheme for TSE. EmoCorrector leverages Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) by extracting the edited text's emotional features, retrieving speech samples with matching emotions, and synthesizing speech that aligns with the desired emotion while preserving the speaker's identity and quality. To support the training and evaluation of emotional consistency modeling in TSE, we pioneer the benchmarking Emotion Correction Dataset for TSE (ECD-TSE). The prominent aspect of ECD-TSE is its inclusion of $<$text, speech$>$ paired data featuring diverse text variations and a range of emotional expressions. Subjective and objective experiments and comprehensive analysis on ECD-TSE confirm that EmoCorrector significantly enhances the expression of intended emotion while addressing emotion inconsistency limitations in current TSE methods. Code and audio examples are available at https://github.com/AI-S2-Lab/EmoCorrector.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.20341 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our approach lies in correcting the emotional mis￾match or inconsistency issue of traditional TSE methods. out altering the speaker’s identity. However, directly using an EVC model presents several issues. 1) Before applying EVC, it is necessary to identify the emotional state embedded in the edited text, a process that may introduce errors. 2) Even if the identified emotion state is accurate, using discrete emotion… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The overall workflow of EmoCorrector. 3.2. Speaker-Emotion Disentanglement Pre-training To disentangle the emotional expression from the speaker’s identity and thus serve the subsequent emotion post-correction., we employ adversarial training with a gradient reversal layer (GRL) as the backbone (as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Introduction Text-based Speech Editing (TSE) modifies audio by editing its underlying text rather than the audio signal directly. With the rise of digital media, TSE has become essential for applications like social media content creation , game voiceovers , and film dubbing , as it corrects issues such as mispronunciations, omis- sions, or stuttering wit...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    sadness” as an ex- ample): “Now, I will give you a sentence. Please modify only one or two words to change the emotion to sadness. Please output only one modified sentence

    Dataset: ECD-TSE For the emotionally consistent modeling of TSE, we need a database where sentences conveying similar lexical informa- tion with few modifications elicit different emotions. Unfor- tunately, popular databases such as the ESD dataset [13], MSP- PODCAST [14], and IEMOCAP [15] are not appropriate for this task since they are usually a fixed t...

    work page

  3. [3]

    The first two modules require pre- training, and then the third module is trained end-to-end

    Methodology: EmoCorrector Our proposed EmoCorrector framework ensures emotional con- sistency in TSE while preserving speaker identity through three stages: 1) Text-Speech Emotion Retrieval Database Construc- tion (Block 1 in Fig.2), 2) Speaker-Emotion Disentanglement Pre-training (Block 2 in Fig.2), and 3) Emotion Post-Correction for TSE (Block 3 in Fig....

    work page

  4. [4]

    Experimental Setup We evaluate EmoCorrector on the ECD-TSE

    Experiments and Results 4.1. Experimental Setup We evaluate EmoCorrector on the ECD-TSE. Precise forced alignment was performed using the Montreal Forced Aligner (MFA) [24]. The dataset was randomly partitioned into train- ing, validation, and test sets in the proportions of 98%, 1%, and 1%, respectively. The EmoCLAP Text Encoder extracts a 768- dimension...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed framework improves emotional consistency in the edited speech

    Conclusion This paper presents a novel emotion post-correction scheme for the TSE task, introducing the new benchmarking ECD- TSE dataset and the EmoCorrector that consists of a three-stage pipeline: Text-Speech Emotion Retrieve Database Construc- tion, Speaker-Emotion Disentanglement Pre-training and Emo- tion Post-Correction for TSE. Experimental result...

    work page

  6. [6]

    62206136), the General Program (No

    Acknowledgement This work was funded by the Young Scientists Fund (No. 62206136), the General Program (No. 62476146) of the Na- tional Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST (2024QNRC001). The work by Haizhou Li was supported by the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (Shenzhen Key Laboratory, G...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Emotional voice con- version: Theory, databases and esd,

    K. Zhou, B. Sisman, R. Liu, and H. Li, “Emotional voice con- version: Theory, databases and esd,”Speech Communication, vol. 137, pp. 1–18, 2022

    2022

  8. [8]

    Fluentspeech: Stutter-oriented automatic speech editing with context-aware diffusion models,

    Z. Jiang, Q. Yang, J. Zuo, Z. Ye, R. Huang, Y . Ren, and Z. Zhao, “Fluentspeech: Stutter-oriented automatic speech editing with context-aware diffusion models,” in Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 , 2023, pp. 11 655– 11 671

    work page 2023

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    A3t: Alignment-aware acoustic and text pretraining for speech synthe- sis and editing,

    H. Bai, R. Zheng, J. Chen, M. Ma, X. Li, and L. Huang, “A3t: Alignment-aware acoustic and text pretraining for speech synthe- sis and editing,” in International Conference on Machine Learn- ing. PMLR, 2022, pp. 1399–1411

    2022

  2. [10]

    Fluenteditor: Text-based speech editing by considering acoustic and prosody consistency,

    R. Liu, J. Xi, Z. Jiang, and H. Li, “Fluenteditor: Text-based speech editing by considering acoustic and prosody consistency,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11725, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Speechx: Neural codec language model as a versatile speech transformer,

    X. Wang, M. Thakker, Z. Chen, N. Kanda, S. E. Eskimez, S. Chen, M. Tang, S. Liu, J. Li, and T. Yoshioka, “Speechx: Neural codec language model as a versatile speech transformer,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    V oice- craft: Zero-shot speech editing and text-to-speech in the wild,

    P. Peng, P. Huang, S. Li, A. Mohamed, and D. Harwath, “V oice- craft: Zero-shot speech editing and text-to-speech in the wild,” in Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , ACL 2024, August 11-16, 2024 , L. Ku, A. Martins, and V ...

    2024

  5. [13]

    Tackling modality heterogeneity with multi-view calibration net- work for multimodal sentiment detection,

    Y . Wei, S. Yuan, R. Yang, L. Shen, Z. Li, L. Wang, and M. Chen, “Tackling modality heterogeneity with multi-view calibration net- work for multimodal sentiment detection,” in Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics (Volume 1: ...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Msp-podcast ser chal- lenge 2024: L’antenne du ventoux multimodal self-supervised learning for speech emotion recognition,

    J. Duret, M. Rouvier, and Y . Est `eve, “Msp-podcast ser chal- lenge 2024: L’antenne du ventoux multimodal self-supervised learning for speech emotion recognition,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.05746, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Decoupling speaker-independent emotions for voice conversion via source-filter networks,

    Z. Luo, S. Lin, R. Liu, J. Baba, Y . Yoshikawa, and H. Ishiguro, “Decoupling speaker-independent emotions for voice conversion via source-filter networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 31, pp. 11–24, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Retrieval- augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks,

    P. Lewis, E. Perez, A. Piktus, F. Petroni, V . Karpukhin, N. Goyal, H. K¨uttler, M. Lewis, W.-t. Yih, T. Rockt¨aschel et al., “Retrieval- augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks,” Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 33, pp. 9459–9474, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Calm: Contrastive cross-modal speaking style modeling for expressive text-to-speech synthesis,

    Y . Meng, X. Li, Z. Wu, T. Li, Z. Sun, X. Xiao, C. Sun, H. Zhan, and H. Meng, “Calm: Contrastive cross-modal speaking style modeling for expressive text-to-speech synthesis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.16021, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Cross-speaker emotion disentangling and transfer for end-to-end speech synthe- sis,

    T. Li, X. Wang, Q. Xie, Z. Wang, and L. Xie, “Cross-speaker emotion disentangling and transfer for end-to-end speech synthe- sis,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 30, pp. 1448–1460, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Ultimately, the Azure system synthesizes speech for 5 speakers, CosyV oice2 synthe- sizes speech for another 5 speakers, and F5-TTS synthesizes speech for an additional 2 speakers

    datasets, both of which provide diverse emotional speech samples for diverse speaker identities. Ultimately, the Azure system synthesizes speech for 5 speakers, CosyV oice2 synthe- sizes speech for another 5 speakers, and F5-TTS synthesizes speech for an additional 2 speakers....

  12. [20]

    Disentangling correlated speaker and noise for speech synthesis via data augmentation and adversarial factoriza- tion,

    W.-N. Hsu, Y . Zhang, R. J. Weiss, Y .-A. Chung, Y . Wang, Y . Wu, and J. Glass, “Disentangling correlated speaker and noise for speech synthesis via data augmentation and adversarial factoriza- tion,” in ICASSP 2019-2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and ...

    2019

  13. [21]

    Seen and unseen emo- tional style transfer for voice conversion with a new emotional speech dataset,

    K. Zhou, B. Sisman, R. Liu, and H. Li, “Seen and unseen emo- tional style transfer for voice conversion with a new emotional speech dataset,” in ICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE International Con- ference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 920–924

    2021

  14. [22]

    Iemocap: Interactive emotional dyadic motion capture database,

    C. Busso, M. Bulut, C.-C. Lee, A. Kazemzadeh, E. Mower, S. Kim, J. N. Chang, S. Lee, and S. S. Narayanan, “Iemocap: Interactive emotional dyadic motion capture database,”Language resources and evaluation, vol. 42, pp. 335–359, 2008

    2008

  15. [23]

    Azure speech studio,

    Microsoft, “Azure speech studio,” https://azure.microsoft.com/ en-us/services/cognitive-services/speech-services/

  16. [24]

    Cosyvoice 2: Scalable stream- ing speech synthesis with large language models,

    Z. Du, Y . Wang, Q. Chen, X. Shi, X. Lv, T. Zhao, Z. Gao, Y . Yang, C. Gao, H. Wanget al., “Cosyvoice 2: Scalable stream- ing speech synthesis with large language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10117, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    F5-tts: A fairytaler that fakes fluent and faithful speech with flow matching,

    Y . Chen, Z. Niu, Z. Ma, K. Deng, C. Wang, J. Zhao, K. Yu, and X. Chen, “F5-tts: A fairytaler that fakes fluent and faithful speech with flow matching,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06885, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Mead: A large-scale audio-visual dataset for emotional talking-face generation,

    K. Wang, Q. Wu, L. Song, Z. Yang, W. Wu, C. Qian, R. He, Y . Qiao, and C. C. Loy, “Mead: A large-scale audio-visual dataset for emotional talking-face generation,” in European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2020, pp. 700–717

    2020

  19. [27]

    Clap learning audio concepts from natural language supervision,

    B. Elizalde, S. Deshmukh, M. Al Ismail, and H. Wang, “Clap learning audio concepts from natural language supervision,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

  20. [28]

    Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining ap- proach,

    Y . Liu, “Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining ap- proach,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692, vol. 364, 2019

    1907 arXiv

  21. [29]

    emotion2vec: Self-supervised pre-training for speech emotion representation

    Z. Ma, Z. Zheng, J. Ye, J. Li, Z. Gao, S. Zhang, and X. Chen, “emotion2vec: Self-supervised pre-training for speech emotion representation.” Association for Computational Linguistics, 2024, pp. 15 747–15 760

    2024

  22. [30]

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

    R. Huang, Y . Ren, J. Liu, C. Cui, and Z. Zhao, “Generspeech: Towards style transfer for generalizable out-of-domain text-to- speech,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 35, pp. 10 970–10 983, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Montreal forced aligner: Trainable text-speech align- ment using kaldi

    M. McAuliffe, M. Socolof, S. Mihuc, M. Wagner, and M. Son- deregger, “Montreal forced aligner: Trainable text-speech align- ment using kaldi.” in Interspeech, vol. 2017, 2017, pp. 498–502

    2017

  24. [32]

    Style tokens: Un- supervised style modeling, control and transfer in end-to-end speech synthesis,

    Y . Wang, D. Stanton, Y . Zhang, R.-S. Ryan, E. Battenberg, J. Shor, Y . Xiao, Y . Jia, F. Ren, and R. A. Saurous, “Style tokens: Un- supervised style modeling, control and transfer in end-to-end speech synthesis,” in International conference on machine learn- ing. PMLR, 2018,...

    2018

  25. [33]

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

    J. Kong, J. Kim, and J. Bae, “Hifi-gan: Generative adversarial net- works for efficient and high fidelity speech synthesis,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 33, pp. 17 022– 17 033, 2020

    2020

  26. [34]

    Qwen2-audio technical re- port,

    Y . Chu, J. Xu, Q. Yang, H. Wei, X. Wei, Z. Guo, Y . Leng, Y . Lv, J. He, J. Lin, C. Zhou, and J. Zhou, “Qwen2-audio technical re- port,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10759, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Editspeech: A text based speech editing system using partial in- ference and bidirectional fusion,

    D. Tan, L. Deng, Y . T. Yeung, X. Jiang, X. Chen, and T. Lee, “Editspeech: A text based speech editing system using partial in- ference and bidirectional fusion,” in2021 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU). IEEE, 2021, pp. 626–633

    2021

  28. [36]

    Transforming spectrum and prosody for emotional voice conversion with non-parallel train- ing data,

    K. Zhou, B. Sisman, and H. Li, “Transforming spectrum and prosody for emotional voice conversion with non-parallel train- ing data,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.00198, 2020

    2002 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Converting anyone’s emotion: Towards speaker-independent emotional voice conver- sion,

    K. Zhou, B. Sisman, M. Zhang, and H. Li, “Converting anyone’s emotion: Towards speaker-independent emotional voice conver- sion,” in Interspeech 2020, 2020, pp. 3416–3420

    2020

Pith tools

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