Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Decoder-only Architecture for Speech Recognition with CTC Prompts and Text Data Augmentation

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 2309.08876 v2 pith:CMLEP6DZ submitted 2023-09-16 eess.AS cs.SD

classification eess.AScs.SD
keywords architecturedatadecoder-onlymodelstexttrainingaugmentationlibrispeech
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Collecting audio-text pairs is expensive; however, it is much easier to access text-only data. Unless using shallow fusion, end-to-end automatic speech recognition (ASR) models require architecture modifications or additional training schemes to use text-only data. Inspired by recent advances in decoder-only language models (LMs), such as GPT-3 and PaLM adopted for speech-processing tasks, we propose using a decoder-only architecture for ASR with simple text augmentation. To provide audio information, encoder features compressed by CTC prediction are used as prompts for the decoder, which can be regarded as refining CTC prediction using the decoder-only model. Because the decoder architecture is the same as an autoregressive LM, it is simple to enhance the model by leveraging external text data with LM training. An experimental comparison using LibriSpeech and Switchboard shows that our proposed models with text augmentation training reduced word error rates from ordinary CTC by 0.3% and 1.4% on LibriSpeech test-clean and testother set, respectively, and 2.9% and 5.0% on Switchboard and CallHome. The proposed model had advantage on computational efficiency compared with conventional encoder-decoder ASR models with a similar parameter setup, and outperformed them on the LibriSpeech 100h and Switchboard training scenarios.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Prepending or Cross-Attention for Speech-to-Text? An Empirical Comparison

    cs.CL 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Across controlled ASR and speech translation experiments, dense feature prepending does not outperform cross-attention in quality and is slightly slower and more memory hungry.

Pith tools