MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415898436 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.06211

Late Fusion and Multi-Level Fission Amplify Cross-Modal Transfer in Text-Speech LMs

2025· preprint· en· W4415898436 on OpenAlexaff
Santiago Cuervo, Adel Moumen, Yanis Labrak, Sameer Khurana, Antoine Laurent, Mickaël Rouvier, Philip C. Woodland, Ricard Marxer

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrinciple of compositionalityFeature (linguistics)Representation (politics)Process (computing)HierarchyModality (human–computer interaction)Transfer (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Text-Speech Language Models (TSLMs) -- language models trained to jointly process and generate text and speech -- are commonly trained through an early modality fusion/fission approach, in which both modalities are fed and predicted from a shared backbone via linear layers. We hypothesize that this approach limits cross-modal transfer by neglecting feature compositionality -- specifically, the finer-grained nature of speech representations compared to text -- preventing the emergence of a shared feature hierarchy within model layers. In this paper, we argue that this limitation can be addressed through late fusion and fission, with a fission process that accesses both high- and low-level features for speech generation. Our models implementing these principles, SmolTolk, rival or surpass state-of-the-art TSLMs trained with orders of magnitude more compute, and achieve significantly improved cross-modal performance relative to early fusion/fission baselines. Representation analyses further suggest that our method enhances the model's ability to abstract higher-level, more semantic features from speech, and leads to increasingly shared representation spaces across layers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.108 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207