Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 96 references

Audio-3DVG: Unified Audio -- Point Cloud Fusion for 3D Visual Grounding

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Raw spoken descriptions, not typed text, can drive 3D visual grounding; the proposed Audio-3DVG pipeline reports the best audio-based accuracy to date on the ScanRefer, Sr3D, and Nr3D benchmarks and matches several text-based systems.

desk verdict Solid second-generation audio-based 3D grounding paper that clearly beats AP-Refer on synthetic audio, but the headline claim rests on Spark-TTS voices and the real-speech check is too thin to carry the practical claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.00669 v2 pith:IGIV56U7 submitted 2025-07-01 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CVcs.RO

Duc Cao-Dinh , Khai Le-Duc , Anh Dao , Bach Phan Tat , Chris Ngo , Duy M. H. Nguyen , Nguyen X. Khanh , Thanh Nguyen-Tang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CVcs.RO
keywords audio-based3Dvisualgroundingspokenlanguageobjectmentiondetectionaudio-guidedattentionpointcloudlocalizationwav2vec2.0text-to-speechsynthesisScanReferbenchmark
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

This paper tries to establish that spoken language can serve as the primary input for 3D visual grounding, the task of picking out the object a description refers to inside a 3D point cloud of a room, without first transcribing the speech to text. The authors argue that treating voice as a second-class input behind typed text, or routing it through an automatic speech recognition step, adds latency and loses acoustic information, so they build a model that consumes raw audio directly. Their central results are a large jump over the previous audio-only system on ScanRefer (40.02 versus 23.09 accuracy at IoU 0.25) and parity or better relative to several text-based competitors, plus a 549-utterance real-voice test set for benchmarking. If the results hold up on real speech, hands-free and low-latency voice control of robots and assistants becomes a practical route into 3D scene understanding.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Audio-Guided Attention Module, an attention layer in which the audio vector is injected directly into the query, key, and value projections of every object proposal: $q_i = W_q o_i + W_q^{(a)} a$, $k_j = W_k o_j + W_k^{(a)} a$, $v_j = W_v o_j + W_v^{(a)} a$, so that attention scores between objects are conditioned on what was said. It comes in two variants: audio-guided self-attention, which separates the target from same-class distractors, and audio-guided cross-attention, which links each target candidate to the relational objects flagged by the companion Object Mention Detection head, a multi-label classifier that predicts which object classes the utterance mentions. PointNet++ object embeddings, GloVe label embeddings, and normalized center and size coordinates are concatenated per proposal, and the whole system is trained with three losses: audio class classification, mention detection, and target-object classification.

What would settle it

Record a public test set of several thousand naturally spoken referring expressions over the same ScanRefer and ReferIt3D sentences, run the released Audio-3DVG model on this set without any fine-tuning, and compare its acc@0.25 against the text-based InstanceRefer number (37.69): if the real-speech accuracy falls below that text baseline or lands within a couple of points of the audio-only AP-Refer, the synthetic-to-real transfer assumption would be the point of failure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Audio-3DVG is a detection-then-matching pipeline: instance segmentation carves the scan into object proposals, a wav2vec 2.0 encoder turns the utterance into a fixed audio vector, and an audio class classifier, an Object Mention Detection head, and an Audio-Guided Attention module jointly select the referred object. The paper's claim is that decomposing the utterance into 'which category is the target' and 'which other object classes are mentioned' makes grounding substantially easier in cluttered scenes, because mentioned objects act as spatial anchors. On ScanRefer the framework reaches 40.02 acc@0.25 overall, 78.26 on the unique-object subset, and 32.78 acc@0.5, against 23.09 and 13.77 for the prior audio-only AP-Refer; grafting the attention module onto the text-based InstanceRefer baseline raises that baseline from 37.69 to 42.84, and on Nr3D and Sr3D the method reports 37.4 and 48.3 overall accuracy. The framework is trained and evaluated on text-to-speech voices synthesized from the standard ScanRefer, Sr3D, and Nr3D text benchmarks, with the 549-sample real-voice set used only as a final held-out test.

Load-bearing premise

The training and headline evaluation assume that text-to-speech voices are faithful stand-ins for real spoken descriptions; every state-of-the-art number except the small 549-sample test is measured on those synthetic voices, and that test has no baselines and is not yet released.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • End-to-end voice-to-object grounding skips automatic speech recognition, cutting measured pipeline time from 1,200 ms for a transcribe-then-ground system to 1,050 ms for the direct system.
  • Object Mention Detection transfers across modalities: adding the audio-guided attention module to the text-based InstanceRefer raises its ScanRefer overall accuracy from 37.69 to 42.84, suggesting relational-mention supervision helps regardless of input modality.
  • Synthesized speech is a scalable training resource: Spark-TTS and Matcha-TTS voices both train the same architecture to audio state of the art on ScanRefer (40.02 versus 39.14 overall acc@0.25), so the method does not depend on one specific TTS voice.
  • The audio classifier alone reaches 96% accuracy and mention detection F1 stays around 0.71-0.77, placing the remaining error in object reasoning rather than speech understanding.
  • Real-world voice grounding is tractable even at small scale: across 549 recorded utterances the model logs 36.72 acc@0.25 on a ScanRefer subset and 46.8 overall on Sr3D, with the dataset planned for release.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the head-to-head win over InstanceRefer (40.02 versus 37.69) is measured on TTS audio, a fair reading is that the method is state of the art for synthetic-speech grounding; whether the margin survives on real microphones remains open until the released real-voice set is used as a matched benchmark with baselines.
  • The same trick of adding a global modality vector to query, key, and value projections could transfer to other grounded-language tasks, such as 2D referring expression comprehension with spoken input or video grounding, wherever the query arrives as speech rather than text.
  • The real-voice test set of 549 utterances across nine speakers is smaller than the validation splits it is meant to represent; a released set of over a thousand utterances with AP-Refer and text-pipeline baselines run under identical settings would turn the reported real-world numbers into a stable benchmark.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. Audio-3DVG proposes a two-stage audio-based 3D visual grounding framework. It uses PointGroup for instance segmentation, wav2vec 2.0 with a BiGRU for audio encoding, an audio classification head, a multi-label Object Mention Detection head, and an Audio-Guided Attention module with self- and cross-attention conditioned on audio features. The model is trained with three losses: audio classification, Object Mention Detection, and object grounding. Audio data is synthesized from the text of ScanRefer, Nr3D, and Sr3D using Spark-TTS, and a small (549-sample) real-speech test set is collected. On ScanRefer, the model reports 40.02 acc@0.25 overall, surpassing the prior audio-only method AP-Refer (23.09) and the text-based InstanceRefer (37.69); on Nr3D and Sr3D it reports 37.4 and 48.3 overall accuracy, respectively, which are comparable to or better than text baselines. Ablations show the Audio-Guided Attention module and Spark-TTS audio are beneficial. The paper also provides a response-time comparison across text, ASR-transcription, and end-to-end audio pipelines.

Significance. If the reported results hold, the paper demonstrates that direct audio-to-3D grounding without ASR can surpass prior audio-only methods and approach text-based performance, which would be a meaningful step for practical voice-driven interaction. The paper uses standard splits and metrics, includes ablations (Tables 5 and 6), and provides a real-speech test set, albeit a small one. The main contributions—Object Mention Detection and Audio-Guided Attention—are well motivated and clearly described. The significance is, however, conditional on the synthetic-to-real transfer being validated, which is currently not convincingly shown: all primary results are on TTS voices, and the only real-speech evaluation lacks baselines and is not released.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Tables 1–2, 5–7] All training and the primary evaluation are conducted on Spark-TTS synthetic audio, while the only real-speech evaluation (Table 7) contains 549 samples, reports no comparison with AP-Refer or text-based baselines on the same recordings, and is explicitly not released. The abstract's state-of-the-art claim for audio-based grounding is therefore established only for TTS voices. This is load-bearing for the paper's practical claim of voice-driven grounding. Please provide a same-protocol comparison on the real recordings (e.g., running AP-Refer and at least one text-based method on the same real audio), release the real dataset, and report a matched synthetic-versus-real performance comparison; alternatively, temper the claims accordingly. The limitation paragraph in §7 acknowledges TTS dependence but does not quantify the gap.
  2. [§3.2] The scene embedding is underspecified: it is stated that a Minkowski Engine sparse ConvNet produces a 512-dimensional feature vector that is concatenated with audio features, but no training objective, loss, or usage in the downstream losses is described, and it is unclear whether the scene encoder is trained end-to-end or frozen. Without this information the method cannot be reproduced, and the contribution of the scene embedding to the reported results is unknown. Please specify the scene encoder's architecture, training procedure, and exact place in the pipeline.
  3. [Eq. (4), §3.4] The loss weights λa, λb, λc in Eq. (4) and the Object Mention Detection threshold in §3.4 are not reported. These are free hyperparameters that directly affect the trained model and the set of relational objects used at inference. Their values are needed for reproducibility and to assess sensitivity; the paper should report them and ideally a small sensitivity analysis.
  4. [Table 1] It is unclear whether the AP-Refer baseline (23.09 overall acc@0.25) is obtained by the authors using the identical Spark-TTS audio input or is taken from the original AP-Refer paper, which may have used a different TTS voice. If the number is from the original paper, the comparison in Table 1 is confounded by TTS differences. The text in §5.2 states "Given the same audio input" but does not describe how this was ensured. Although Table 5 (Matcha-TTS) suggests the margin survives a different TTS, the paper should state explicitly whether AP-Refer was re-run on the same audio, and if not, provide that result.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] "highlight the promise" should be "highlighting the promise".
  2. [§3.1] "scence" should be "scene".
  3. [§3.2] "embedd" should be "embed".
  4. [Table 7] The table reports only a subset of metrics per dataset and leaves some cells as "x"; please indicate the sample counts for each subset and unify the metric reporting across the three datasets.
  5. [§6.3] The response-time comparison would be clearer if the hardware configuration and the definition of each reported time (e.g., whether user speaking time is included) were given explicitly.
  6. [Appendices B–F] Appendices B–F consist largely of textbook ASR material (wav2vec 2.0, CTC, MFCC) that is not needed to understand or reproduce the method; I recommend trimming these to the relevant details or moving them to supplementary material.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: all reported accuracies come from held-out test sets against external baselines; synthetic audio is a data-generation choice, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

Walked the claimed derivation chain. The method contributes an architecture (Object Mention Detection plus Audio-Guided Attention) trained with standard losses in Eq. (4) on audio rendered from ScanRefer/Nr3D/Sr3D text via Spark-TTS. The reported ScanRefer, Nr3D, and Sr3D numbers use held-out validation/test splits and compare against AP-Refer and text-based methods. No result is obtained by construction: the audio classifier, OMD head, and grounding head are all learned from data, and the attention module's contribution is checked by an ablation (Table 6), not by definition. The TTS-based audio is generated from the same textual annotations that supply labels, but this is a data-production choice; it would be a validity threat only if the paper claimed real-speech SOTA on the strength of synthetic-only numbers. The paper does include a 549-sample real-world test (Table 7), but it is baseline-free and unreleased, so it provides weak transfer evidence; that is an external-validation limitation, not circularity. No load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness-theorem invocation, renamed empirical pattern, or fitted-parameter-as-prediction was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is modest because this is an empirical method paper rather than a derivation. The main free parameters are unreported hyperparameters (loss weights, OMD threshold). The key domain assumptions are the representativeness of synthetic speech, the reliability of PointGroup proposals, and automatic extraction of object mentions from text. No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Loss balancing weights lambda_a, lambda_b, lambda_c = not reported
    Equation 4 defines the total loss as a weighted sum of three losses; the values are never reported, so the relative contribution of each auxiliary loss to training is undocumented.
  • Object Mention Detection threshold = not reported
    Section 3.4 states that objects with predicted probabilities exceeding a predefined threshold are treated as relational objects. The threshold value is not given, and it directly controls which objects enter the attention module.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption wav2vec 2.0 representations contain enough semantic and phonetic information to support 3D object grounding from audio.
    Section 3.2 uses wav2vec 2.0 as the audio encoder; the paper reviews its properties in the appendix but does not verify that the frozen features align with 3D object categories in the grounding task.
  • domain assumption PointGroup instance segmentation provides accurate object proposals.
    Section 3.1 relies on a pretrained PointGroup to extract object instances, and the Limitations section notes performance is tied to segmentation quality.
  • domain assumption Object class mentions can be extracted automatically from the text annotations to supervise the Object Mention Detection task.
    Section 3.4 introduces OMD but does not describe the extraction protocol from text or verify its accuracy; the supervision source is assumed to be clean and complete.
  • domain assumption Spark-TTS synthetic speech is a faithful proxy for real spoken queries.
    Section 4 generates training audio with Spark-TTS; Table 7 shows a modest accuracy drop on real recordings, which supports the assumption approximately, but the real set is small and unreleased.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Audio-3DVG: Unified Audio -- Point Cloud Fusion for 3D Visual Grounding." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IGIV56U7

@misc{pith2026250700669,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Audio-3DVG: Unified Audio -- Point Cloud Fusion for 3D Visual Grounding},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IGIV56U7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.00669}
}
read the original abstract

3D Visual Grounding (3DVG) involves localizing target objects in 3D point clouds based on natural language. While prior work has made strides using textual descriptions, leveraging spoken language-known as Audio-based 3D Visual Grounding-remains underexplored and challenging. Motivated by advances in automatic speech recognition (ASR) and speech representation learning, we propose Audio-3DVG, a simple yet effective framework that integrates audio and spatial information for enhanced grounding. Rather than treating speech as a monolithic input, we decompose the task into two complementary components. First, we introduce (i) Object Mention Detection, a multi-label classification task that explicitly identifies which objects are referred to in the audio, enabling more structured audio-scene reasoning. Second, we propose an (ii) Audio-Guided Attention module that models the interactions between target candidates and mentioned objects, enhancing discrimination in cluttered 3D environments. To support benchmarking, we (iii) synthesize audio descriptions for standard 3DVG datasets, including ScanRefer, Sr3D, and Nr3D. Experimental results demonstrate that Audio-3DVG not only achieves new state-of-the-art performance in audio-based grounding, but also competes with text-based methods, highlight the promise of integrating spoken language into 3D vision tasks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.00669 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the overall pipeline. Our network processes the 3D point cloud using an object [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An overview of the proposed Audio-Guided Attention Module, comprising the Audio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Age distribution of the entire real-world dataset, including ScanRefer, Nr3D and Sr3D. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (25 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Age distribution of the real-world ScanRefer set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Age distribution of the real-world Nr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Age distribution of the real-world Sr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Gender distribution of the entire real-world dataset, including ScanRefer, Nr3D and Sr3D. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Gender distribution of the real-world ScanRefer set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Gender distribution of the real-world Nr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Gender distribution of the real-world Sr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Nationality distribution of the entire real-world dataset, including ScanRefer, Nr3D and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Wordcount distribution of the entire real-world dataset, including ScanRefer, Nr3D and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Wordcount distribution of the real-world ScanRefer set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Wordcount distribution of the real-world Nr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Wordcount distribution of the real-world Sr3D set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: wav2vec 2.0 architecture B.1.1 Self-Supervised Pre-training Wave normalization: The raw audio waveform AT ∈ R T is first normalized to the range between 0 and 1 by the wave normalization function WaveNorm before being pushed into the feature extractor, as shown in Equ…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Visualization of properties encoded at different wav2vec 2.0 layers. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: CCA similarity with local features [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: CCA similarity between layer representations and fbank; Ci: CNN layer i, Tj: transformer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: MI with phone labels (max: 3.6) and CCA similarity with AGWE. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: MI with word labels (max: 6.2). similarity between word segment representations and GloVe embeddings [69], as illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: CCA similarity with GloVe embeddings [69]. B.4.4 Fine-tuning Effect As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_24.png]
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: CCA similarity between each layer of a pre-trained model and the same layer of fine-tuned [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: OpenAI’s Whisper architecture. Whisper is a Transformer-based AED architecture, using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_26.png]
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Deepgram’s Nova-2 architecture. To our best understanding of Deepgram’s documentation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_27.png]
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: MFCC visualization. The computation of MFCCs begins by dividing the original waveform [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_28.png]
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: SpecAugment visualization. From top to bottom, the figures show the spectrogram of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_29.png]
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: An illustrative CTC lattice, adapted from [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_30.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Referit3d: Neural listeners for fine-grained 3d object identification in real-world scenes

    Panos Achlioptas, Ahmed Abdelreheem, Fei Xia, Mohamed Elhoseiny, and Leonidas Guibas. Referit3d: Neural listeners for fine-grained 3d object identification in real-world scenes. 16th European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) , 2020

    2020

  2. [2]

    Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probes

    Guillaume Alain and Y oshua Bengio. Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probes. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) Workshops , 2016

    2016

  3. [3]

    Layer normalization

    Jimmy Lei Ba, Jamie Ryan Kiros, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Layer normalization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.06450, 2016

    arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Effectiveness of self-supervised pre-training for asr

    Alexei Baevski and Abdelrahman Mohamed. Effectiveness of self-supervised pre-training for asr. In ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 7694–7698. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  5. [5]

    vq-wav2vec: Self-supervised learning of discrete speech representations

    Alexei Baevski, Steffen Schneider, and Michael Auli. vq-wav2vec: Self-supervised learning of discrete speech representations. In International Conference on Learning Representations

  6. [6]

    wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech representations

    Alexei Baevski, Henry Zhou, Abdel rahman Mohamed, and Michael Auli. wav2vec 2.0: A framework for self-supervised learning of speech representations. ArXiv, 2020

    2020

  7. [7]

    On using specaugment for end-to-end speech translation

    Parnia Bahar, Albert Zeyer, Ralf Schlueter, and Hermann Ney. On using specaugment for end-to-end speech translation. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Spoken Language Translation, 2019

    2019

  8. [8]

    Joint unsupervised and supervised training for multilingual asr

    Junwen Bai, Bo Li, Yu Zhang, Ankur Bapna, Nikhil Siddhartha, Khe Chai Sim, and Tara N Sainath. Joint unsupervised and supervised training for multilingual asr. In ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pages 6402–6406. IEEE, 2022

    2022

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    T. Bayes. An Essay Towards Solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 53:370–418, 1763

  2. [10]

    Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeffr...

    2020

  3. [11]

    Scanrefer: 3d object localization in rgb-d scans using natural language

    Dave Zhenyu Chen, Angel X Chang, and Matthias Nie ßner. Scanrefer: 3d object localization in rgb-d scans using natural language. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XX 16 , pages 202–221. Springer, 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    Touchdown: Natural language navigation and spatial reasoning in visual street environments

    Howard Chen, Alane Suhr, Dipendra Kumar Misra, Noah Snavely, and Y oav Artzi. Touchdown: Natural language navigation and spatial reasoning in visual street environments. 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2018

    2019

  5. [13]

    Language conditioned spatial relation reasoning for 3d object grounding

    Shizhe Chen, Pierre-Louis Guhur, Makarand Tapaswi, Cordelia Schmid, and Ivan Laptev. Language conditioned spatial relation reasoning for 3d object grounding. In NeurIPS, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Wavlm: Large-scale self-supervised pre- training for full stack speech processing

    Sanyuan Chen, Chengyi Wang, Zhengyang Chen, Yu Wu, Shujie Liu, Zhuo Chen, Jinyu Li, Naoyuki Kanda, Takuya Y oshioka, Xiong Xiao, et al. Wavlm: Large-scale self-supervised pre- training for full stack speech processing. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing , 16(...

    2022

  7. [15]

    A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations

    Ting Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, and Geoffrey Hinton. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In International conference on machine learning, pages 1597–1607. PmLR, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    Cops-ref: A new dataset and task on compositional referring expression comprehension

    Zhenfang Chen, Peng Wang, Lin Ma, Kwan- Y ee Kenneth Wong, and Qi Wu. Cops-ref: A new dataset and task on compositional referring expression comprehension. 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2020. 45

    2020

  9. [17]

    Self-supervised learning with random-projection quantizer for speech recognition

    Chung-Cheng Chiu, James Qin, Yu Zhang, Jiahui Yu, and Y onghui Wu. Self-supervised learning with random-projection quantizer for speech recognition. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 3915–3924. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    4d spatio-temporal convnets: Minkowski convolutional neural networks

    Christopher Choy, Joon Gwak, and Silvio Savarese. 4d spatio-temporal convnets: Minkowski convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Chang, Manolis Savva, Maciej Halber, Thomas A

    Angela Dai, Angel X. Chang, Manolis Savva, Maciej Halber, Thomas A. Funkhouser, and Matthias Nießner. Scannet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes. 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    Comparison of parametric representations for monosyllabic word recognition in continuously spoken sentences

    Steven Davis and Paul Mermelstein. Comparison of parametric representations for monosyllabic word recognition in continuously spoken sentences. IEEE transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing, 28(4):357–366, 1980

    1980

  13. [21]

    Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human langu...

    2019

  14. [22]

    Towards better domain adaptation for self-supervised models: A case study of child asr

    Ruchao Fan, Yunzheng Zhu, Jinhan Wang, and Abeer Alwan. Towards better domain adaptation for self-supervised models: A case study of child asr. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 16(6):1242–1252, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Benchmarking children’s asr with supervised and self-supervised speech foundation models

    Ruchao Fan, Natarajan Balaji Shankar, and Abeer Alwan. Benchmarking children’s asr with supervised and self-supervised speech foundation models. In Proc. Interspeech 2024, pages 5173–5177, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Losses can be blessings: Routing self-supervised speech representations towards efficient multilingual and multitask speech processing

    Y onggan Fu, Y ang Zhang, Kaizhi Qian, Zhifan Y e, Zhongzhi Yu, Cheng-I Jeff Lai, and Celine Lin. Losses can be blessings: Routing self-supervised speech representations towards efficient multilingual and multitask speech processing. Advances in Neural Information Processing S...

    2022

  17. [25]

    Gemmeke, Daniel P

    Jort F. Gemmeke, Daniel P . W . Ellis, Dylan Freedman, Aren Jansen, Wade Lawrence, R. Chan- ning Moore, Manoj Plakal, and Marvin Ritter. Audio set: An ontology and human-labeled dataset for audio events. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Proces...

    2017

  18. [26]

    Audiovisual masked autoencoders

    Mariana-Iuliana Georgescu, Eduardo Fonseca, Radu Tudor Ionescu, Mario Lucic, Cordelia Schmid, and Anurag Arnab. Audiovisual masked autoencoders. 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , 2022

    2023

  19. [27]

    Data-driven deep modeling and training for automatic speech recognition

    Pavel Golik. Data-driven deep modeling and training for automatic speech recognition . PhD thesis, Dissertation, RWTH Aachen University, 2020, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Connectionist temporal classification

    Alex Graves. Connectionist temporal classification. In Supervised sequence labelling with recurrent neural networks, pages 61–93. Springer, 2012

    2012

  21. [29]

    Towards End-to-End Speech Recognition with Recurrent Neural Networks

    Alex Graves and Navdeep Jaitly. Towards End-to-End Speech Recognition with Recurrent Neural Networks. pages 1764–1772, Beijing, China, 2014

    2014

  22. [30]

    Connectionist temporal classification: labelling unsegmented sequence data with recurrent neural networks

    Alex Graves, Santiago Fernández, Faustino Gomez, and J ¨urgen Schmidhuber. Connectionist temporal classification: labelling unsegmented sequence data with recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning , pages 369–376, 2006

    2006

  23. [31]

    On Using Monolingual Corpora in Neural Machine Translation, 2015

    Caglar Gulcehre, Orhan Firat, Kelvin Xu, Kyunghyun Cho, Loic Barrault, Huei-Chi Lin, Fethi Bougares, Holger Schwenk, and Y oshua Bengio. On Using Monolingual Corpora in Neural Machine Translation, 2015. arXiv:1503.03535

    2015 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning

    Kaiming He, Haoqi Fan, Yuxin Wu, Saining Xie, and Ross Girshick. Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 9729–9738, 2020. 46

    2020

  25. [33]

    Gaussian error linear units (gelus)

    Dan Hendrycks and Kevin Gimpel. Gaussian error linear units (gelus). arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415, 2016

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Advances in Joint CTC-Attention Based End-to-End Speech Recognition with a Deep CNN Encoder and RNN-LM

    Takaaki Hori, Shinji Watanabe, Yu Zhang, and William Chan. Advances in Joint CTC-Attention Based End-to-End Speech Recognition with a Deep CNN Encoder and RNN-LM. pages 949–953, Stockhol, Sweden, 2017

    2017

  27. [35]

    Relations between two sets of variates

    Harold Hotelling. Relations between two sets of variates. Biometrika, 28(3/4):321–377, 1936

    1936

  28. [36]

    Hubert: Self-supervised speech representation learning by masked prediction of hidden units

    Wei-Ning Hsu, Benjamin Bolte, Y ao-Hung Hubert Tsai, Kushal Lakhotia, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Abdelrahman Mohamed. Hubert: Self-supervised speech representation learning by masked prediction of hidden units. IEEE/ACM transactions on audio, speech, and language processing , 2...

    2021

  29. [37]

    Wei-Ning Hsu, Y ao-Hung Hubert Tsai, Benjamin Bolte, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Abdelrah- man Mohamed. Hubert: How much can a bad teacher benefit asr pre-training? In ICASSP 2021- 2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pages 653...

    2021

  30. [38]

    Character-level language modeling with hierarchical recurrent neural networks

    Kyuyeon Hwang and Wonyong Sung. Character-level language modeling with hierarchical recurrent neural networks. pages 5720–5724, New Orleans, LA, 2017. IEEE

    2017

  31. [39]

    Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift

    Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In International conference on machine learning , pages 448–456. pmlr, 2015

    2015

  32. [40]

    Investigation on estimation of sentence probability by combining forward, backward and bi-directional lstm-rnns

    Kazuki Irie, Zhihong Lei, Liuhui Deng, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. Investigation on estimation of sentence probability by combining forward, backward and bi-directional lstm-rnns. In Interspeech 2018, pages 392–395, 2018

    2018

  33. [41]

    Language Modeling with Deep Transformers

    Kazuki Irie, Albert Zeyer, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. Language Modeling with Deep Transformers. pages 3905–3909, Graz, Austria, 2019

    2019

  34. [42]

    Mercer, Lalit R

    Frederick Jelinek, Robert L. Mercer, Lalit R. Bahl, and Janet M. Baker. Perplexity—a measure of the difficulty of speech recognition tasks. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America , 62, 1977

    1977

  35. [43]

    Pointgroup: Dual-set point grouping for 3d instance segmentation

    Li Jiang, Hengshuang Zhao, Shaoshuai Shi, Shu Liu, Chi-Wing Fu, and Jiaya Jia. Pointgroup: Dual-set point grouping for 3d instance segmentation. 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    Mdetr - modulated detection for end-to-end multi-modal understanding

    Aishwarya Kamath, Mannat Singh, Y ann LeCun, Ishan Misra, Gabriel Synnaeve, and Nicolas Carion. Mdetr - modulated detection for end-to-end multi-modal understanding. 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 1760–1770, 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    Sainath, Zhifeng Chen, and Ro- hit Prabhavalkar

    Anjuli Kannan, Y onghui Wu, Patrick Nguyen, Tara N. Sainath, Zhifeng Chen, and Ro- hit Prabhavalkar. An Analysis of Incorporating an External Language Model into a Sequence-to-Sequence Model. pages 5824–5828, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2018. DOI: 10.1109/ICASSP .2018.8462682

    2018

  38. [46]

    Sahar Kazemzadeh, Vicente Ordonez, Marc andre Matten, and Tamara L. Berg. Referitgame: Referring to objects in photographs of natural scenes. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2014

    2014

  39. [47]

    Improved backing-off for m-gram language modeling

    Reinhard Kneser and Hermann Ney. Improved backing-off for m-gram language modeling. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing , pages 181–184, Detroit, Michigan, USA, 1995

    1995

  40. [48]

    Similarity of neural network representations revisited

    Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, Honglak Lee, and Geoffrey Hinton. Similarity of neural network representations revisited. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , pages 3519–3529. PMLR, 2019

    2019

  41. [49]

    Mix-fine-tune: An alternate fine- tuning strategy for domain adaptation and generalization of low-resource asr

    Chengxi Lei, Satwinder Dr Singh, Feng Hou, and Ruili Wang. Mix-fine-tune: An alternate fine- tuning strategy for domain adaptation and generalization of low-resource asr. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Conference on Multimedia in Asia , pages 1–7, 2024. 47

    2024

  42. [50]

    Levenshtein

    Vladimir I. Levenshtein. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet physics. Doklady, 10:707–710, 1965

    1965

  43. [51]

    Self-supervised audio teacher-student transformer for both clip-level and frame-level tasks

    Xian Li, Nian Shao, and Xiaofei Li. Self-supervised audio teacher-student transformer for both clip-level and frame-level tasks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 2023

    2023

  44. [52]

    Tera: Self-supervised learning of transformer encoder representation for speech

    Andy T Liu, Shang-Wen Li, and Hung-yi Lee. Tera: Self-supervised learning of transformer encoder representation for speech. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 29:2351–2366, 2021

    2021

  45. [53]

    Clevr-ref+: Diagnosing visual reasoning with referring expressions

    Runtao Liu, Chenxi Liu, Yutong Bai, and Alan Loddon Yuille. Clevr-ref+: Diagnosing visual reasoning with referring expressions. 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019

    2019

  46. [54]

    Improving referring expression grounding with cross-modal attention-guided erasing

    Xihui Liu, Zihao Wang, Jing Shao, Xiaogang Wang, and Hongsheng Li. Improving referring expression grounding with cross-modal attention-guided erasing. 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2019

    2019

  47. [55]

    Siyu Lou, Xuenan Xu, Mengyue Wu, and K. Yu. Audio-text retrieval in context. ICASSP 2022 - 2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , 2022

    2022

  48. [56]

    3d-sps: Single-stage 3d visual grounding via referred point progressive selection

    Junyu Luo, Jiahui Fu, Xianghao Kong, Chen Gao, Haibing Ren, Hao Shen, Huaxia Xia, and Si Liu. 3d-sps: Single-stage 3d visual grounding via referred point progressive selection. 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2022

    2022

  49. [57]

    Rwth asr systems for librispeech: Hybrid vs attention

    Christoph L ¨uscher, Eugen Beck, Kazuki Irie, Markus Kitza, Wilfried Michel, Albert Zeyer, Ralf Schl¨uter, and Hermann Ney. Rwth asr systems for librispeech: Hybrid vs attention. In Proc. Interspeech 2019, pages 231–235, 2019

    2019

  50. [58]

    Semi-supervised maximum mutual information training of deep neural network acoustic models

    Vimal Manohar, Daniel Povey, and Sanjeev Khudanpur. Semi-supervised maximum mutual information training of deep neural network acoustic models. In Interspeech 2015, pages 2630–2634, 2015

    2015

  51. [59]

    Junhua Mao, Jonathan Huang, Alexander Toshev, Oana-Maria Camburu, Alan Loddon Yuille, and Kevin P . Murphy. Generation and comprehension of unambiguous object descriptions. 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2015

    2016

  52. [60]

    Matcha-tts: A fast tts architecture with conditional flow matching

    Shivam Mehta, Ruibo Tu, Jonas Beskow, Éva Székely, and Gustav Eje Henter. Matcha-tts: A fast tts architecture with conditional flow matching. ICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , 2023

    2024

  53. [61]

    Distributed repre- sentations of words and phrases and their compositionality

    Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. Distributed repre- sentations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Advances in neural information processing systems, 26, 2013

    2013

  54. [62]

    Self-supervised speech representation learning: A review

    Abdelrahman Mohamed, Hung-yi Lee, Lasse Borgholt, Jakob D Havtorn, Joakim Edin, Christian Igel, Katrin Kirchhoff, Shang-Wen Li, Karen Livescu, Lars Maal øe, et al. Self-supervised speech representation learning: A review. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 1...

    2022

  55. [63]

    Insights on representational similarity in neural networks with canonical correlation

    Ari S Morcos, Maithra Raghu, and Samy Bengio. Insights on representational similarity in neural networks with canonical correlation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 5727–5736, 2018

    2018

  56. [64]

    Acoustic modeling of phoneme units for continuous speech recognition

    Hermann Ney. Acoustic modeling of phoneme units for continuous speech recognition. In Proc. Fifth Europ. Signal Processing Conf , pages 65–72, 1990

    1990

  57. [65]

    OpenAI, Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Flo- rencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, Red Avila, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Valerie Balcom, Paul Baltescu, Haiming Bao, Mohammad Bavarian, Jef...

    2024

  58. [66]

    Specaugment: A simple data augmentation method for automatic speech recognition

    Daniel S Park, William Chan, Yu Zhang, Chung-Cheng Chiu, Barret Zoph, Ekin D Cubuk, and Quoc V Le. Specaugment: A simple data augmentation method for automatic speech recognition. Interspeech, 2019

    2019

  59. [67]

    Layer-wise analysis of a self-supervised speech representation model

    Ankita Pasad, Ju-Chieh Chou, and Karen Livescu. Layer-wise analysis of a self-supervised speech representation model. In 2021 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU), pages 914–921. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  60. [68]

    Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher D. Manning. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , 2014

    2014

  61. [69]

    Glove: Global vectors for word representation

    Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher D Manning. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pages 1532–1543, 2014. 49

    2014

  62. [70]

    Pointnet++: Deep hierarchical feature learning on point sets in a metric space

    Charles Ruizhongtai Qi, Li Yi, Hao Su, and Leonidas J Guibas. Pointnet++: Deep hierarchical feature learning on point sets in a metric space. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  63. [71]

    Reverie: Remote embodied visual referring expression in real indoor environments

    Yuankai Qi, Qi Wu, Peter Anderson, Xin Eric Wang, William Y ang Wang, Chunhua Shen, and Anton van den Hengel. Reverie: Remote embodied visual referring expression in real indoor environments. 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019

    2020

  64. [72]

    A Tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and Selected Applications in Speech Recognition

    Lawrence R Rabiner. A Tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and Selected Applications in Speech Recognition. 77(2):257–286, 1989

    1989

  65. [73]

    Language models are unsupervised multitask learners

    Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, Ilya Sutskever, et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog, 1(8):9, 2019

    2019

  66. [74]

    Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Tao Xu, Greg Brockman, Christine McLeavey, and Ilya Sutskever. Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision. In International Conference on Machine Learning, 2022

    2022

  67. [75]

    Svcca: Singular vector canonical correlation analysis for deep learning dynamics and interpretability

    Maithra Raghu, Justin Gilmer, Jason Y osinski, and Jascha Sohl-Dickstein. Svcca: Singular vector canonical correlation analysis for deep learning dynamics and interpretability. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 6078–6087, 2017

    2017

  68. [76]

    Leveraging the multilingual indonesian ethnic languages dataset in self-supervised models for low-resource asr task

    Sakriani Sakti and Benita Angela Titalim. Leveraging the multilingual indonesian ethnic languages dataset in self-supervised models for low-resource asr task. In 2023 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU), pages 1–8. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  69. [77]

    wav2vec: Unsupervised pre-training for speech recognition

    Steffen Schneider, Alexei Baevski, Ronan Collobert, and Michael Auli. wav2vec: Unsupervised pre-training for speech recognition. In Proc. Interspeech 2019, pages 3465–3469, 2019

    2019

  70. [78]

    LSTM Neural Networks for Language Modeling

    Martin Sundermeyer, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. LSTM Neural Networks for Language Modeling. pages 194–197, Portland, OR, 2012

    2012

  71. [79]

    End-to-end asr: from supervised to semi-supervised learning with modern architectures

    Gabriel Synnaeve, Qiantong Xu, Jacob Kahn, Tatiana Likhomanenko, Edouard Grave, Vineel Pratap, Anuroop Sriram, Vitaliy Liptchinsky, and Ronan Collobert. End-to-end asr: from supervised to semi-supervised learning with modern architectures. In ICML 2020 Workshop on Self-supervi...

    2020

  72. [80]

    Attention is all you need

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  73. [81]

    Investigating the’autoencoder behavior’in speech self-supervised models: a focus on hubert’s pretraining

    Valentin Vielzeuf. Investigating the’autoencoder behavior’in speech self-supervised models: a focus on hubert’s pretraining. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.08402, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Efficient utilization of large pre-trained models for low resource asr

    Peter Vieting, Christoph L ¨uscher, Julian Dierkes, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. Efficient utilization of large pre-trained models for low resource asr. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing Workshops (ICASSPW) , pages 1–5. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  75. [83]

    The bottom-up evolution of representations in the transformer: A study with machine translation and language modeling objectives

    Elena Voita, Rico Sennrich, and Ivan Titov. The bottom-up evolution of representations in the transformer: A study with machine translation and language modeling objectives. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th I...

    2019

  76. [84]

    Learning two-branch neural networks for image-text matching tasks

    Liwei Wang, Yin Li, Jing Huang, and Svetlana Lazebnik. Learning two-branch neural networks for image-text matching tasks. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 41:394–407, 2017

    2017

  77. [85]

    Spark-tts: An efficient llm-based text-to-speech model with single-stream decoupled speech tokens

    Xinsheng Wang, Mingqi Jiang, Ziyang Ma, Ziyu Zhang, Songxiang Liu, Linqin Li, Zheng Liang, Qixi Zheng, Rui Wang, Xiaoqin Feng, Weizhen Bian, Zhen Y e, Sitong Cheng, Ruibin Yuan, Zhixian Zhao, Xinfa Zhu, Jiahao Pan, Liumeng Xue, Pengcheng Zhu, Yunlin Chen, Zhifei Li, Xie Chen, ...

    2025

  78. [86]

    Cooperative game modeling with weighted token-level alignment for audio-text retrieval

    Yifei Xin, Baojun Wang, and Lifeng Shang. Cooperative game modeling with weighted token-level alignment for audio-text retrieval. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2023

    2023

  79. [87]

    Explore wav2vec 2.0 for mispronunciation detection

    Xiaoshuo Xu, Yueteng Kang, Songjun Cao, Binghuai Lin, and Long Ma. Explore wav2vec 2.0 for mispronunciation detection. In Interspeech, pages 4428–4432, 2021

    2021

  80. [88]

    A detailed audio-text data simulation pipeline using single-event sounds

    Xuenan Xu, Xiaohang Xu, Zeyu Xie, Pingyue Zhang, Mengyue Wu, and Kai Yu. A detailed audio-text data simulation pipeline using single-event sounds. ICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , 2024

    2024

  81. [89]

    Sat: 2d semantics assisted training for 3d visual grounding

    Zhengyuan Y ang, Songyang Zhang, Liwei Wang, and Jiebo Luo. Sat: 2d semantics assisted training for 3d visual grounding. 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021

    2021

  82. [90]

    Instancere- fer: Cooperative holistic understanding for visual grounding on point clouds through instance multi-level contextual referring

    Zhihao Yuan, Xu Y an, Yinghong Liao, Ruimao Zhang, Zhen Li, and Shuguang Cui. Instancere- fer: Cooperative holistic understanding for visual grounding on point clouds through instance multi-level contextual referring. 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (...

    2021

  83. [91]

    A comparison of transformer and lstm encoder decoder models for asr

    Albert Zeyer, Parnia Bahar, Kazuki Irie, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. A comparison of transformer and lstm encoder decoder models for asr. In IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop, pages 8–15, Sentosa, Singapore, 2019

    2019

  84. [92]

    A new training pipeline for an improved neural transducer

    Albert Zeyer, André Merboldt, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. A new training pipeline for an improved neural transducer. In Interspeech, Shanghai, China, 2020. [slides]

    2020

  85. [93]

    Why does CTC Result in Peaky Behavior?,

    Albert Zeyer, Ralf Schl ¨uter, and Hermann Ney. Why does CTC Result in Peaky Behavior?,

  86. [94]

    3d visual grounding-audio: 3d scene object detection based on audio

    Can Zhang, Zeyu Cai, Xunhao Chen, Feipeng Da, and Shaoyan Gai. 3d visual grounding-audio: 3d scene object detection based on audio. Neurocomputing, 611:128637, 2024

    2024

  87. [95]

    Revisiting few-sample bert fine-tuning

    Tianyi Zhang, Felix Wu, Arzoo Katiyar, Kilian Q Weinberger, and Y oav Artzi. Revisiting few-sample bert fine-tuning. In International Conference on Learning Representations

  88. [96]

    3dvg-transformer: Relation modeling for visual grounding on point clouds

    Lichen Zhao, Daigang Cai, Lu Sheng, and Dong Xu. 3dvg-transformer: Relation modeling for visual grounding on point clouds. 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021. 51

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.