Multimodal Physiological Quality-of-Experience Assessment of Text-to-Speech Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the growing complexity of various text-to-speech systems, it is becoming more important to understand the underlying perceptual and judgement processes that drive user Quality-of-Experience (QoE) perception. Typical QoE assessment techniques, such as listening tests with self-report ratings, are useful but provide limited insight into these underlying processes. Recent advances in neuroimaging and physiological monitoring technologies, however, have opened new doors and allowed us to better understand and measure QoE perception. In this paper, we explore the use of two neuroimaging techniques, namely electroencephalography (EEG) and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), to better understand neuronal and cerebral haemodynamic changes resultant from synthesized speech of varying quality. Neural correlates of several QoE dimensions were derived and validated on the publicly available PhySyQX database. Fusion of EEG, fNIRS, and fNIRS-derived physiological parameters, combined with conventional features extracted from the synthesized speech signal showed to accurately represent several QoE dimensions, including those related to listener affective states. It is hoped that these findings will help researchers build better instrumental QoE models that incorporate technological, contextual, and human influence factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it