The Spoken Language Understanding Evaluation (SLUE) suite of benchmark tasks was recently introduced to address the need for openresources and benchmarking of complex spoken language understanding (SLU) tasks, including both classification and sequence generation tasks, on natural speech. The benchmark has demonstrated preliminary success in using pre-trained speech foundation models (SFM) for these SLU tasks. However, the community still lacks a fine-grained understanding of the comparative utility of different SFMs. Inspired by this, we ask: which SFMs offer the most benefits for these complex SLU tasks, and what is the most effective approach for incorporating these SFMs? To answer this, we perform an extensive evaluation of multiple supervised and self-supervised SFMs using several evaluation protocols: (i) frozen SFMs with a lightweight prediction head, (ii) frozen SFMs with a complex prediction head, and (iii) fine-tuned SFMs with a lightweight prediction head. Although the supervised SFMs are pre-trained on much more speech recognition data (with labels), they do not always outperform self-supervised SFMs; the latter tend to perform at least as well as, and sometimes better than, supervised SFMs, especially on the sequence generation tasks in SLUE. While there is no universally optimal way of incorporating SFMs, the complex prediction head gives the best performance for most tasks, although it increases the inference time. We also introduce an open-source toolkit and performance leaderboard, SLUE-PERB, for these tasks and modeling strategies.
Reference summaries for abstractive speech summarization require human annotation, which can be performed by listening to an audio recording or by reading textual transcripts of the recording. In this paper, we examine whether summaries based on annotators listening to the recordings differ from those based on annotators reading transcripts. Using existing intrinsic evaluation based on human evaluation, automatic metrics, LLM-based evaluation, and a retrieval-based reference-free method, we find that summaries are indeed different based on the source modality, and that speech-based summaries are more factually consistent and information-selective than transcript-based summaries. Transcript-based summaries are impacted by recognition errors in the source, and expert-written summaries are more informative and reliable. We make all the collected data and analysis code public to facilitate the reproduction of our work and advance research in this area.
Spoken language understanding (SLU) tasks have been studied for many decades in the speech research community, but have not received as much attention as lower-level tasks like speech and speaker recognition. In this work, we introduce several new annotated SLU benchmark tasks based on freely available speech data, which complement existing benchmarks and address gaps in the SLU evaluation landscape. We contribute four tasks: question answering and summarization involve inference over longer speech sequences; named entity localization addresses the speech-specific task of locating the targeted content in the signal; dialog act classification identifies the function of a given speech utterance. In order to facilitate the development of SLU models that leverage the success of pre-trained speech representations, we will release a new benchmark suite, including for each task (i) curated annotations for a relatively small fine-tuning set, (ii) reproducible pipeline (speech recognizer + text model) and end-to-end baseline models and evaluation metrics, (iii) baseline model performance in various types of systems for easy comparisons. We present the details of data collection and annotation and the performance of the baseline models. We also analyze the sensitivity of pipeline models’ performance to the speech recognition accuracy, using more than 20 publicly availablespeech recognition models.
Spoken language understanding (SLU) tasks involve mapping from speech signals to semantic labels. Given the complexity of such tasks, good performance is expected to require large labeled datasets, which are difficult to collect for each new task and domain. However, recent advances in self-supervised speech representations have made it feasible to consider learning SLU models with limited labeled data. In this work, we focus on low-resource spoken named entity recognition (NER) and address the question: Beyond self-supervised pre-training, how can we use external speech and/or text data that are not annotated for the task? We consider self-training, knowledge distillation, and transfer learning for end-to-end (E2E) and pipeline (speech recognition followed by text NER) approaches. We find that several of these approaches improve performance in resource-constrained settings beyond the benefits from pre-trained representations. Compared to prior work, we find relative improvements in F1 of up to 16%. While the best baseline model is a pipeline approach, the best performance using external data is ultimately achieved by an E2E model. We provide detailed comparisons and analyses, developing insights on, for example, the effects of leveraging external data on (i) different categories of NER errors and (ii) the switch in performance trends between pipeline and E2E models.
We present the results and the findings of the Second VarDial Evaluation Campaign on Natural Language Processing (NLP) for Similar Languages, Varieties and Dialects. The campaign was organized as part of the fifth edition of the VarDial workshop, collocated with COLING’2018. This year, the campaign included five shared tasks, including two task re-runs – Arabic Dialect Identification (ADI) and German Dialect Identification (GDI) –, and three new tasks – Morphosyntactic Tagging of Tweets (MTT), Discriminating between Dutch and Flemish in Subtitles (DFS), and Indo-Aryan Language Identification (ILI). A total of 24 teams submitted runs across the five shared tasks, and contributed 22 system description papers, which were included in the VarDial workshop proceedings and are referred to in this report.