Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 31 references

Transcript-Prompted Whisper with Dictionary-Enhanced Decoding for Japanese Speech Annotation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Conditioning Whisper on the transcript and correcting its phonemes with a dictionary yields Japanese TTS labels that match manual annotation in a listening test.

desk verdict Useful transcript-prompting result; the dictionary-enhanced step is unvalidated and the MOS claim overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07646 v1 pith:GGSTXJFA submitted 2025-06-09 cs.CL cs.SDeess.AS

Rui Hu , Xiaolong Lin , Jiawang Liu , Shixi Huang , Zhenpeng Zhan This is my paper
classification cs.CLcs.SDeess.AS
keywords JapaneseTTSannotationWhisperfine-tuningtranscriptpromptingphonemiclabelingprosodicdictionary-enhanceddecodingpitchaccentspeech
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that high-quality Japanese text-to-speech labels—phonemic readings and pitch-accent/prosody marks—can be generated automatically from ordinary audio-transcript pairs. It fine-tunes the Whisper ASR model to take the transcript as a decoder prompt and output, phrase by phrase, the graphemes together with their TTS labels, then adds a dictionary-based correction pass over the predicted phonemes. Objective metrics on phoneme error, accent-phrase boundary accuracy, and mora-level pitch F1 show the transcript-conditioned model outperforming text-only and audio-only baselines, and a listening test shows a TTS model trained on these labels is rated near or above one trained on manual annotations. If this holds, the main cost bottleneck in building Japanese TTS corpora—expensive manual phonemic and prosodic annotation—can be bypassed.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is transcript-prompted decoding combined with dictionary-enhanced error correction. The transcript is tokenized and placed between the Whisper decoder's previous-context and transcript-start tokens, so the cross-attention decoder sees both acoustic representations and exact text; special Unicode symbols stand for pitch rise, pitch fall, accent boundary, pause, and the grapheme-label delimiter, avoiding ordinary symbols whose pre-trained meanings cause hallucination. During decoding, at each accent-phrase boundary the predicted graphemes are segmented by MeCab with UniDic, candidate pronunciations are looked up for each word, and the shortest-edit-distance candidate replaces the model's predicted pronunciation; the accent type is preserved for flat, head-high, and tail-high phrases and shifted by the mora-size difference for middle-high phrases.

What would settle it

A concrete check: hold out utterances with known labels, run the model with and without the dictionary pass, and compute phoneme CER separately on phrases where UniDic's candidate list excludes the reference reading; if the dictionary pass does not improve CER on those covered phrases, or if it improves even on uncovered phrases, the improvement is not coming from the dictionary prior as described. Reporting the coverage rate of candidate lists and the error breakdown would settle whether the claimed gain is real.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a transcript-conditioned annotation model can replace bespoke front-ends for Japanese TTS data. The decoder of Whisper is fine-tuned so that, given the audio plus the known transcript as a prompt, it emits each accent phrase's graphemes followed by its phonemic and prosodic labels; the transcript resolves the polyphone and accent ambiguity that audio-only models stumble on. The dictionary pass then uses MeCab and UniDic to enumerate all legal pronunciations of the segmented phrase and keeps the one closest to the model's prediction, with an accent-type adjustment rule that leaves flat, head-high, and tail-high accents untouched and shifts middle-high accents by the mora-count difference. The reported result is 0.57% phoneme CER, 87.32% accent-phrase boundary accuracy, and 94.58% pitch F1 on the private corpus, with a MOS of 4.29 against 4.27 for manual annotation on the same corpus.

Load-bearing premise

The dictionary correction step assumes that MeCab's segmentation of the predicted graphemes matches the intended words and that UniDic's candidate list for each word contains the true pronunciation, so that shortest edit distance recovers the correct phonemes; if segmentation or dictionary coverage fails, the method silently replaces correct labels with the nearest dictionary pronunciation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Audio-transcript pairs can be turned into TTS-ready labels without specialized annotation pipelines, since the same fine-tuned model outputs both content and labels in one pass.
  • Transcript conditioning fixes phonetic confusions that audio-only annotation models make, dropping phoneme CER from 1.13% to 0.63% on the private corpus, and further to 0.57% with dictionary correction.
  • The dictionary correction is confined inside accent phrases, so accent-phrase boundary accuracy is unchanged and pitch F1 drops by only 0.01 points, meaning the correction improves phonemes without materially hurting prosody.
  • TTS models trained on these automatic labels reach MOS comparable to TTS models trained on manual labels, suggesting automatic annotation can substitute for manual annotation in Japanese TTS data construction.
  • Because the model's phrase-level graphemes align with the given transcript to a CER of 0.16%, the dictionary-lookup correction is feasible in practice.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, the same transcript-prompting recipe is a natural fit for Mandarin, where polyphones create the same one-to-many reading problem; a dictionary-based decoding step over pinyin candidates would be the direct analogue.
  • Beyond the paper, the phrase-level graphemes the model emits are themselves a usable polyphone disambiguation resource; testing whether a text-only accent estimator trained on these labels closes part of its gap to audio-conditioned models would separate the transcript's contribution from the dictionary's.
  • Beyond the paper, replacing the whole-phrase shortest-edit-distance selection with a Viterbi search over per-word pronunciation lattices should make the correction robust to grapheme errors, a case the current pass would silently mishandle.
  • Beyond the paper, the MOS result slightly above manual annotation on PRIV suggests that automatic labels may be more internally consistent than multi-annotator labels; measuring inter-annotator agreement and comparing it with model-versus-annotator disagreement would test this directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a method for automatically annotating Japanese TTS labels (phonemic and prosodic) from audio-transcript pairs. The authors fine-tune Whisper with the ground-truth transcript inserted as a decoder prompt, so the model outputs phrase-level graphemes followed by TTS labels. A dictionary-enhanced decoding step then uses MeCab with UniDic to segment the predicted graphemes, look up candidate pronunciations, and replace the predicted pronunciation with the closest dictionary candidate. Objective evaluations on a public JSUT-trained setup and a larger private PRIV setup compare the method against Open JTalk, audio-only Whisper, and transcript-prompted Whisper without the dictionary step, reporting CER, accent-phrase accuracy, and mora-level pitch F1. Subjective MOS tests evaluate a VITS TTS model trained on labels produced by each annotation method. The authors conclude that the proposed annotation method outperforms text-only and audio-only baselines and achieves scores comparable to or slightly higher than manual annotation.

Significance. If the claims hold, the method has clear practical value for building Japanese TTS corpora: high-quality phonemic and prosodic labels could be produced automatically from audio-transcript pairs, avoiding expensive manual annotation. The transcript-prompting idea is simple and well motivated, and conditioning Whisper on ground-truth text while still requiring it to predict graphemes is a sensible way to combine acoustic and semantic information. The use of a dictionary prior is also a reasonable way to inject external knowledge. The paper includes both public and private datasets, an objective evaluation, and a listening test, which is more than many annotation papers do. However, the evidence as presented is incomplete: no significance testing is reported for any objective metric, the prosodic metrics are computed on a filtered subset, the dictionary step is not internally validated, and the MOS claim of beating manual annotation is not supported by the reported confidence intervals. The core idea is plausible and the manuscript is worth revising, but the load-bearing quantitative claims need additional support.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, Table 2] The headline improvement from the dictionary step is not established. Annt-v4-priv achieves 0.57% CER versus 0.63% for Annt-v3-priv, a difference of 0.06 percentage points, and no confidence intervals, error bars, or significance tests are reported for any objective metric. The statement in Section 4 that Annt-v4 'achieves the best performance of phonemic labeling' therefore overstates what the table supports; the authors should report paired significance tests or variance across test splits or model seeds.
  2. [Section 3.1] Prosodic accuracy and F1 are computed only on utterances where all models correctly predict the phonemic labels. This filtering removes exactly the utterances where phonemic errors occur, including those the dictionary step is intended to repair, and the manuscript does not report how many utterances remain after filtering. Without this number, the accuracy and F1 comparisons in Table 2 cannot be interpreted as overall prosodic labeling quality, and the slight F1 degradation of Annt-v4 relative to Annt-v3 may not be representative.
  3. [Section 2.3] The dictionary-enhanced decoding step is never validated internally. The paper reports aggregate CER gains for Annt-v4 over Annt-v3, but no MeCab segmentation agreement rate, no dictionary coverage rate, no correction precision or recall, and no analysis of cases where the shortest-edit-distance candidate is wrong or tied. Because Section 2.3 explicitly concedes that restoration of TTS labels is 'not perfect,' the net CER improvement could come from a small number of corrected phrases while other phrases are silently corrupted. The paper's namesake contribution therefore remains unsupported as presented; at minimum the authors should report correction precision, recall, and failure cases on a sample of test utterances.
  4. [Section 4, Table 3] The claim that Annt-v4 'achieves scores slightly higher than manual annotation (i.e., Oracle) on PRIV' is not supported by the reported intervals: Annt-v4-priv is 4.29 ± 0.08 and Oracle is 4.27 ± 0.08. These intervals overlap substantially, and no significance test is reported, so the appropriate conclusion is that Annt-v4 is statistically indistinguishable from Oracle, not that it surpasses it. The word 'slightly higher' should be replaced with 'comparable' unless a paired test shows a reliable difference.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.3] There are two small typos: 'outupt' should be 'output' in the Annt-v2 description, and 'Annt-v4-prv' should be 'Annt-v4-priv' in the Annt-v4 description.
  2. [Section 2.3, Equation (1)] In Equation (1), the symbols M_orig, M_mod, A_orig, and n are introduced in the surrounding text, but the equation itself would benefit from a sentence explicitly defining 'n' as the mora size of the original phrase and clarifying that A_orig is an accent type in {0, 1, ..., n}.
  3. [Section 3.2] The use of GPT-4 to obtain phrase-level aligned annotations for JSUT is mentioned without any detail on the prompt, the verification procedure, or the error rate of the GPT-4 alignments; a sentence or two on how this was validated would strengthen reproducibility.
  4. [Section 4] The sentence 'All annotation models utilizing audio information significantly outperform the text-based method' uses 'significantly' without a significance test; this is a wording issue separate from the major concern about Table 2.
  5. [Section 3.1] The metric definitions would be clearer if the authors stated whether CER is computed over Katakana characters or mora units, and whether the phonemic labels include accent phrase boundary symbols during CER calculation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: label targets are external manual annotations, the transcript is an input prompt, and dictionary correction uses external priors.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The claimed predictions are phonemic labels (CER), accent phrase boundaries (Acc.), and mora-level pitch sequences (F1), all scored against external manual annotations. The ground-truth transcript is an input prompt, not a restatement of those labels; even the grapheme alignment check in Section 4 is used only as a feasibility check for dictionary decoding, not as evidence of label accuracy. The dictionary-enhanced decoding in Section 2.3 uses MeCab/UniDic candidate pronunciations and shortest-edit-distance selection, which are external prior knowledge and do not access the reference labels; the edit-distance objective is to the model's own prediction, so the reported CER improvement is an empirical outcome rather than a mathematical identity. The paper explicitly acknowledges a limitation in Section 2.3 ('the restoration of TTS labels is not perfect') and reports the resulting slight pitch degradation in Table 2, which is an honest limitation statement rather than a circular construction. Any author-overlap citations in the prompt-tuning background (e.g., [17] or [18], if their J. Liu is a present author) are not load-bearing for the central annotation result. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no derived equation reduces to its own input. The central claims remain externally benchmarked, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on data-side assumptions (faithful transcripts, dictionary coverage, manual label validity) and one heuristic (accent restoration). These are reasonable for the stated TTS-dataset-construction task, but the heuristic is unvalidated.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Ground-truth transcripts are available for every audio input and are used as decoder prompts.
    The method is defined for audio-transcript pairs; without a faithful transcript, the prompt cannot disambiguate Kanji readings. Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption MeCab with UniDic correctly segments graphemes into words and provides all plausible pronunciations needed for correction.
    Dictionary-enhanced decoding selects the candidate with shortest edit distance; if the true reading is absent, correction cannot recover it. Section 2.3.
  • ad hoc to paper The accent-type restoration rule in Equation 1 preserves the accent nucleus when mora count changes.
    Amod = Aorig + (Mmod - Morig) for middle-high accents is stated without derivation or empirical validation; the paper notes restoration is imperfect. Equation 1.
  • domain assumption Manual TTS labels and Tokyo-dialect notation are a valid ground truth despite annotator inconsistency.
    All CER, Acc, and F1 metrics and Oracle comparisons use these annotations; the paper invokes annotator inconsistency to explain Oracle scores. Sections 2.1 and 4.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transcript-Prompted Whisper with Dictionary-Enhanced Decoding for Japanese Speech Annotation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GGSTXJFA

@misc{pith2026250607646,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transcript-Prompted Whisper with Dictionary-Enhanced Decoding for Japanese Speech Annotation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GGSTXJFA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07646}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we propose a method for annotating phonemic and prosodic labels on a given audio-transcript pair, aimed at constructing Japanese text-to-speech (TTS) datasets. Our approach involves fine-tuning a large-scale pre-trained automatic speech recognition (ASR) model, conditioned on ground truth transcripts, to simultaneously output phrase-level graphemes and annotation labels. To further correct errors in phonemic labeling, we employ a decoding strategy that utilizes dictionary prior knowledge. The objective evaluation results demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms previous approaches relying solely on text or audio. The subjective evaluation results indicate that the naturalness of speech synthesized by the TTS model, trained with labels annotated using our method, is comparable to that of a model trained with manual annotations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07646 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of proposed annotation model with a decoding strategy that leverages dictionary prior knowledge. 輪廻 は 廻っ N ri ne wa ma wa Q te TTS Labels リ ] ン ネ ワ # マ [ ワ ッ て _ Pitch Transcript H L て 、 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example of Japanese speech annotation for “輪廻 は廻って、” (The cycle of reincarnation turns, and...). The yellow squares denote the transcript segmented into accent phrases, with each accent phrase further divided into individual words. The white circles in gray area indicate the pitch status (high or low) of each mora. The red and blue squares denote phonemic and prosodic labels, respectively. of Tokyo dialect. The TTS … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Introduction The field of text-to-speech (TTS) has seen significant advance- ments in the past few years. Recent studies [1, 2, 3] have demonstrated that large models trained on massive datasets can synthesize natural speech directly from grapheme sequences, eliminating the need for more fine-grained inputs such as phonemes. This is particularly notable i...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Transcript-Prompted Whisper with Dictionary-Enhanced Decoding for Japanese Speech Annotation

    Method 2.1. Notation method for TTS labels Japanese is a pitch-accent language with a writing system that combines logograms (Kanji) with phonograms (Hiragana and Katakana). As depicted in Figure 2, annotation for Japanese ut- terances typically consists of transcript and pitch status aligned at the mora level. We adopt the notation method proposed in [5]...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    #”. For each accent phrase, we divide it into graphemes and TTS labels using the delimiter “|

    Experimental setup 3.1. Evaluation metrics In the experiments, we aim to evaluate our proposed annotation method in three aspects: • The alignment of predicted phrase-level graphemes with the given transcript. • The performance of phonemic and prosodic labeling. • The effectiveness of its application in TTS systems. We first segment the predicted utteranc...

    work page

  4. [4]

    ブィ ” and “ビ

    Experimental results We calculate the CER of grapheme sequences predicted by Annt-v3-priv on the testing data of PRIV and the result is 0.16%. Interestingly, most of the errors occur when the model changes graphemes to another form identical in pronunciation, such as “ブィ ” and “ビ”, or when it normalizes numbers, such as converting “1 週” to “ 一週”. One poss...

    work page

  5. [5]

    To address the phonemic labeling issue associated with Kanji characters, we adopt a decoding strategy that incorporates dic- tionary prior knowledge

    Conclusion In this paper, we propose an annotation model fine-tuned from a pre-trained ASR model to produce graphemes along with their phonemic and prosodic labels for given audio-transcript pairs. To address the phonemic labeling issue associated with Kanji characters, we adopt a decoding strategy that incorporates dic- tionary prior knowledge. Experimen...

    work page

  6. [6]

    A unified front-end framework for english text-to-speech syn- thesis,

    Z. Ying, C. Li, Y . Dong, Q. Kong, Q. Tian, Y . Huo, and Y . Wang, “A unified front-end framework for english text-to-speech syn- thesis,” in ICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2024, pp. 10 181–10 185

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    E2 tts: Embarrass- ingly easy fully non-autoregressive zero-shot tts,

    S. E. Eskimez, X. Wang, M. Thakker, C. Li, C.-H. Tsai, Z. Xiao, H. Yang, Z. Zhu, M. Tang, X. Tan et al. , “E2 tts: Embarrass- ingly easy fully non-autoregressive zero-shot tts,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18009, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Cosyvoice: A scalable multi- lingual zero-shot text-to-speech synthesizer based on supervised semantic tokens,

    Z. Du, Q. Chen, S. Zhang, K. Hu, H. Lu, Y . Yang, H. Hu, S. Zheng, Y . Gu, Z. Ma et al. , “Cosyvoice: A scalable multi- lingual zero-shot text-to-speech synthesizer based on supervised semantic tokens,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.05407, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    Fish-speech: Leveraging large language models for advanced multilingual text-to-speech synthesis,

    S. Liao, Y . Wang, T. Li, Y . Cheng, R. Zhang, R. Zhou, and Y . Xing, “Fish-speech: Leveraging large language models for advanced multilingual text-to-speech synthesis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01156, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Impacts of input linguistic feature representation on japanese end-to-end speech synthesis,

    T. Fujimoto, K. Hashimoto, K. Oura, Y . Nankaku, and K. Tokuda, “Impacts of input linguistic feature representation on japanese end-to-end speech synthesis,” in 10th ISCA Speech Synthesis Workshop. ISCA, Vienna, Austria, 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    However, these methods either only focus on prosody annotation or rely on complicated pipelines

    achieved automatic prosody labeling using text-audio data via a speech-text model while [12] proposed a Grapheme-to- Phoneme (G2P) module utilizing both text and aligned audio to overcome pronunciation ambiguity. However, these methods either only focus on prosody annotation o...

  4. [12]

    Prosodic features con- trol by symbols as input of sequence-to-sequence acoustic mod- eling for neural tts,

    K. Kurihara, N. Seiyama, and T. Kumano, “Prosodic features con- trol by symbols as input of sequence-to-sequence acoustic mod- eling for neural tts,” IEICE Transactions on Information and Sys- tems, vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 302–311, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Unified mandarin tts front-end based on distilled bert model,

    Y . Zhang, L. Deng, and Y . Wang, “Unified mandarin tts front-end based on distilled bert model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.15404, 2020

    2012 arXiv

  6. [14]

    A unified accent esti- mation method based on multi-task learning for japanese text-to- speech,

    B. Park, R. Yamamoto, and K. Tachibana, “A unified accent esti- mation method based on multi-task learning for japanese text-to- speech,” in Interspeech 2022, 2022, pp. 1931–1935

    2022

  7. [15]

    End-to-end asr to jointly predict transcriptions and linguistic annotations,

    M. Omachi, Y . Fujita, S. Watanabe, and M. Wiesner, “End-to-end asr to jointly predict transcriptions and linguistic annotations,” in Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chap- ter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Lan- guage Technolog...

    2021

  8. [16]

    Audio- conditioned phonemic and prosodic annotation for building text- to-speech models from unlabeled speech data,

    Y . Shirahata, B. Park, R. Yamamoto, and K. Tachibana, “Audio- conditioned phonemic and prosodic annotation for building text- to-speech models from unlabeled speech data,” in Interspeech 2024, 2024, pp. 2795–2799

    2024

  9. [17]

    Automatic prosody annotation with pre-trained text- speech model,

    Z. Dai, J. Yu, Y . Wang, N. Chen, Y . Bian, G. Li, D. Cai, and D. Yu, “Automatic prosody annotation with pre-trained text- speech model,” in Interspeech 2022, 2022, pp. 5513–5517

    2022

  10. [18]

    G2pa: G2p with aligned audio for mandarin chinese,

    X. Yang, “G2pa: G2p with aligned audio for mandarin chinese,” in Interspeech 2024, 2024, pp. 2800–2804

    2024

  11. [19]

    Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,

    A. Radford, J. W. Kim, T. Xu, G. Brockman, C. McLeavey, and I. Sutskever, “Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,” in International conference on machine learning . PMLR, 2023, pp. 28 492–28 518

    2023

  12. [20]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, “Attention is all you need,” Advances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems, 2017

    2017

  13. [21]

    Zero-shot domain-sensitive speech recognition with prompt- conditioning fine-tuning,

    F.-T. Liao, Y .-C. Chan, Y .-C. Chen, C.-J. Hsu, and D.-s. Shiu, “Zero-shot domain-sensitive speech recognition with prompt- conditioning fine-tuning,” in2023 IEEE Automatic Speech Recog- nition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–8

    2023

  14. [22]

    Prompt tuning for speech recognition on unknown spoken name entities,

    X. Wei and S. McGregor, “Prompt tuning for speech recognition on unknown spoken name entities,” in Interspeech 2024, 2024, pp. 762–766

    2024

  15. [23]

    Extending whisper with prompt tuning to target-speaker asr,

    H. Ma, Z. Peng, M. Shao, J. Li, and J. Liu, “Extending whisper with prompt tuning to target-speaker asr,” inICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2024, pp. 12 516–12 520

    2024

  16. [24]

    Perceiver-prompt: Flexible speaker adaptation in whisper for chinese disordered speech recognition,

    Y . Jiang, T. Wang, X. Xie, J. Liu, W. Sun, N. Yan, H. Chen, L. Wang, X. Liu, and F. Tian, “Perceiver-prompt: Flexible speaker adaptation in whisper for chinese disordered speech recognition,” in Interspeech 2024, 2024, pp. 2025–2029

    2024

  17. [25]

    Applying conditional random fields to japanese morphological analysis,

    T. Kudo, K. Yamamoto, and Y . Matsumoto, “Applying conditional random fields to japanese morphological analysis,” in Proceed- ings of the 2004 conference on empirical methods in natural lan- guage processing, 2004, pp. 230–237

    2004

  18. [26]

    A proper approach to japanese morphological analysis: Dictionary, model, and eval- uation

    Y . Den, J. Nakamura, T. Ogiso, and H. Ogura, “A proper approach to japanese morphological analysis: Dictionary, model, and eval- uation.” in LREC, 2008

    2008

  19. [27]

    Jsut corpus: free large-scale japanese speech corpus for end-to-end speech synthe- sis,

    R. Sonobe, S. Takamichi, and H. Saruwatari, “Jsut corpus: free large-scale japanese speech corpus for end-to-end speech synthe- sis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.00354, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Gpt-4 technical report,

    J. Achiam, S. Adler, S. Agarwal, L. Ahmad, I. Akkaya, F. L. Ale- man, D. Almeida, J. Altenschmidt, S. Altman, S. Anadkat et al., “Gpt-4 technical report,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Jvs corpus: free japanese multi-speaker voice cor- pus,

    S. Takamichi, K. Mitsui, Y . Saito, T. Koriyama, N. Tanji, and H. Saruwatari, “Jvs corpus: free japanese multi-speaker voice cor- pus,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.06248, 2019

    1908 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing,

    T. Wolf, L. Debut, V . Sanh, J. Chaumond, C. Delangue, A. Moi, P. Cistac, T. Rault, R. Louf, M. Funtowicz, J. Davison, S. Shleifer, P. von Platen, C. Ma, Y . Jernite, J. Plu, C. Xu, T. L. Scao, S. Gugger, M. Drame, Q. Lhoest, and A. M. Rush, “Transformers: State-of-the-art nat...

    2020

  23. [31]

    Conditional variational autoencoder with adversarial learning for end-to-end text-to-speech,

    J. Kim, J. Kong, and J. Son, “Conditional variational autoencoder with adversarial learning for end-to-end text-to-speech,” in Inter- national Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 2021, pp. 5530–5540

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.