SepALM: Audio Language Models Are Error Correctors for Robust Speech Separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While contemporary speech separation technologies adeptly process lengthy mixed audio waveforms, they are frequently challenged by the intricacies of real-world environments, including noisy and reverberant settings, which can result in artifacts or distortions in the separated speech. To overcome these limitations, we introduce SepALM, a pioneering approach that employs audio language models (ALMs) to rectify and re-synthesize speech within the text domain following preliminary separation. SepALM comprises four core components: a separator, a corrector, a synthesizer, and an aligner. By integrating an ALM-based end-to-end error correction mechanism, we mitigate the risk of error accumulation and circumvent the optimization hurdles typically encountered in conventional methods that amalgamate automatic speech recognition (ASR) with large language models (LLMs). Additionally, we have developed Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and knowledge distillation techniques to facilitate the reasoning and training processes of the ALM. Our experiments substantiate that SepALM not only elevates the precision of speech separation but also markedly bolsters adaptability in novel acoustic environments.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".