REVIEW 3 cited by
SIFT-50M: A Large-Scale Multilingual Dataset for Speech Instruction Fine-Tuning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We introduce SIFT (Speech Instruction Fine-Tuning), a 50M-example dataset designed for instruction fine-tuning and pre-training of speech-text large language models (LLMs). SIFT-50M is built from publicly available speech corpora, which collectively contain 14K hours of speech, and leverages LLMs along with off-the-shelf expert models. The dataset spans five languages, encompassing a diverse range of speech understanding as well as controllable speech generation instructions. Using SIFT-50M, we train SIFT-LLM, which outperforms existing speech-text LLMs on instruction-following benchmarks while achieving competitive performance on foundational speech tasks. To support further research, we also introduce EvalSIFT, a benchmark dataset specifically designed to evaluate the instruction-following capabilities of speech-text LLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
LLaSO: A Foundational Framework for Reproducible Research in Large Language and Speech Model
LLaSO releases a 3.8B speech-language model, 25.5M training instances, and an evaluation benchmark, claiming a normalized score of 0.72.
-
Incorporating Contextual Paralinguistic Understanding in Large Speech-Language Models
Training a speech-LLM on question-answer pairs generated with both discrete and continuous emotion labels improves its contextual emotion reasoning as scored by an LLM judge.
-
A Survey of Automatic Evaluation Methods on Text, Visual and Speech Generations
A unified taxonomy and comparative meta-evaluation of automatic evaluation methods across text, vision, and speech generation, concluding that LLM-based evaluators dominate current practice.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.