Code-switching (CS), the alternation between two or more languages within a single speaker’s utterances, is common in real-world conversations and poses significant challenges for multilingual speech technology. However, systems capable of handling this phenomenon remain underexplored, primarily due to the scarcity of suitable datasets. To resolve this issue, we propose Universal Code-Mixer (UniCoM), a novel pipeline for generating high-quality, natural CS samples without altering sentence semantics. Our approach utilizes an algorithm we call Substituting WORDs with Synonyms (SWORDS), which generates CS speech by replacing selected words with their translations while considering their parts of speech. Using UniCoM, we construct Code-Switching FLEURS (CS-FLEURS), a multilingual CS corpus designed for automatic speech recognition (ASR) and speech-to-text translation (S2TT). Experimental results show that CS-FLEURS achieves high intelligibility and naturalness, performing comparably to existing datasets on both objective and subjective metrics. We expect our approach to advance CS speech technology and enable more inclusive multilingual systems.

This paper describes the DSBA submissions to the Prompting Large Language Models as Explainable Metrics shared task, where systems were submitted to two tracks: small and large summarization tracks. With advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-4, evaluating the quality of Natural Language Generation (NLG) has become increasingly paramount. Traditional similarity-based metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE have shown to misalign with human evaluation and are ill-suited for open-ended generation tasks. To address this issue, we explore the potential capability of LLM-based metrics, especially leveraging open-source LLMs. In this study, wide range of prompts and prompting techniques are systematically analyzed with three approaches: prompting strategy, score aggregation, and explainability. Our research focuses on formulating effective prompt templates, determining the granularity of NLG quality scores and assessing the impact of in-context examples on LLM-based evaluation. Furthermore, three aggregation strategies are compared to identify the most reliable method for aggregating NLG quality scores. To examine explainability, we devise a strategy that generates rationales for the scores and analyzes the characteristics of the explanation produced by the open-source LLMs. Extensive experiments provide insights regarding evaluation capabilities of open-source LLMs and suggest effective prompting strategies.