Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 37 references

AutoSIFT claims that a text prompt can edit individual style categories—emotion, age, gender, language—in generated speech while every unspecified category and all residual voice traits of the reference speaker are preserved.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 06:20 UTC pith:3I23ZJVK

load-bearing objection AutoSIFT defines a genuinely useful task and is carefully engineered, but its core claim — overriding a text-specified style category that conflicts with the reference — is never trained or isolated; that gap is load-bearing. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.12706 v2 pith:3I23ZJVK submitted 2026-07-14 cs.SD

AutoSIFT: Automatic Style Sifting for Controllable Speech Generation with Arbitrary Style Infilling

Haowei Lou , Junda Wu , Chengkai Huang , Tong Yu , Hye-young Paik , Wen Hu , Lina Yao This is my paper
classification cs.SD
keywords arbitrary style infillingstyle disentanglementcontrollable text-to-speechstyle prototypesresidual style preservationcategory-level speech editingtext-prompted speech generationspeech reference transfer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper proposes that controllable speech generation should be formulated as Arbitrary Style Infilling: given a text prompt naming some style categories and a reference speech sample, the system should replace only the named categories and inherit everything else from the reference. To do this, AutoSIFT splits a holistic style embedding into category-specific prototypes for gender, age, emotion, and language, plus a residual embedding that carries timbre, breathiness, rhythm, and other non-verbal detail. A gated fusion step takes the text-derived embedding for each category the prompt names, takes the speech-derived prototype for every category it does not name, and always takes the residual from speech. Training reconstructs the original reference style embedding, with labels randomly dropped so the fuser learns to fall back on speech. If the claim holds, a user can record one neutral sentence and then generate angry, elderly, or female versions of that same voice without re-recording.

Core claim

AutoSIFT claims that speaking style can be decomposed into known text-describable categories plus a residual, and that a gated infiller can replace only the categories a text prompt names while borrowing all other categories and the residual from reference speech. The infiller's rule is Eq. (9): use the text embedding where the prompt is explicit, use the speech prototype otherwise, and always keep the speech residual. The fuser is trained with Eq. (10), reconstructing the reference style embedding, with 25% of labels randomly dropped so the model learns to fall back on speech. The reported outcome: single-category edits honor the prompt while preserving speaker identity and prosody, and con

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the gated sifting rule of Eq. (9) with asymmetric residual inheritance: for each category c_i, the fused embedding f_ci is the text embedding t_ci when the prompt specifies that category, and the stop-gradient speech prototype sg(s_hat_ci) otherwise; the residual s_hat_r is always taken from the reference speech. The gate is trained by the style reconstruction loss of Eq. (10), L_asi = ||S_hat_f - sg(S)||^2, where S is the reference style embedding. A censored-learning trick randomly drops 25% of category labels during training, so the fuser learns to pivot to the speech branch whenever a textual anchor is absent. This makes the module an infiller rather than a

Load-bearing premise

The training objective only ever shows the infiller text labels that match the reference utterance's own style categories—the censored-learning trick merely drops labels, never supplies a conflicting one—so the claim that a prompt like 'angry' can override a non-angry reference rests on the unproven assumption that the gate replaces rather than blends or ignores the reference category.

What would settle it

Run AutoSIFT on a reference clip labeled 'happy' with a text prompt 'angry', then classify the output with an independent emotion classifier and measure style similarity to the reference. If the output is not confidently 'angry' or the speaker's timbre and rhythm drift beyond what a same-speaker angry recording would show, the arbitrary-infilling claim fails; a pass requires both the requested category to land and all unrequested categories plus residual similarity to survive.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • A neutral reference clip plus an 'angry' text prompt should produce angry speech that keeps the speaker's timbre, breathiness, and rhythm intact.
  • Single-category edits are the strongest regime; as more categories are specified in text, the paper reports control accuracy declines from inter-category interference.
  • Text-only prompts, speech-only prompts, and mixed prompts all drive the same frozen TTS backbone, with the infiller interpolating between the two sources.
  • Language and gender control approach 100% accuracy, while emotion and age sit near 90%, reflecting how acoustically separable each category is.
  • Speech-prompted generation retains high style similarity to the reference speaker, and even text-only prompts keep more than half of the reference style similarity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The decisive untested case is a text prompt that directly contradicts the reference's own category label; the training procedure never presents one, so the gate's override behavior is extrapolation, and a conflicting-prompt experiment would settle it.
  • Residual preservation is likely bounded by the residual codebook's capacity; ablating codebook size would reveal whether the reported style-similarity gains are true disentanglement or simply copying bandwidth.
  • Because the infiller only swaps prototypes in a shared style space, the same sift-and-fill rule could extend to other discrete attributes such as accent, speaking rate, or register if prototype sets were added.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. AutoSIFT proposes Arbitrary Style Infilling (ASI): given a text prompt specifying an arbitrary subset of style categories (gender, age, emotion, language) and a reference speech utterance, the system should replace only the text-specified categories while preserving the unspecified categories and the residual, non-categorical style from the reference. The method consists of a style extractor that produces a holistic style embedding, a disentangler that decomposes it into category prototypes and a quantized residual subspace (Sec. 4.2), and an infiller that fuses text-derived category embeddings with speech-derived unspecified/residual embeddings through a hard gate (Eq. 9), trained by reconstructing the reference style embedding (Eq. 10). Experiments report disentanglement accuracy, intelligibility, naturalness, style similarity, and the proposed DSA/RSA metrics on a bilingual multi-style dataset.

Significance. If the central ASI claim holds, the paper would make a useful contribution: it formalizes a fine-grained editing task that goes both text-prompted TTS and speech-reference style transfer, and it provides a modular, reproducible pipeline with a three-stage training scheme. The evaluation is comparatively extensive: DSA/RSA use separately trained frozen evaluators on held-out real speech, the ablations (e.g., the PAL-collapse result in Table 1) are informative, and the proposed metrics directly target the stated task. These are concrete strengths. However, the current evidence does not yet establish the central claim of replacing text-specified categories when those categories conflict with the reference speech, because the training and evaluation protocols do not appear to include such conflicts.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.3, Eqs. (9)–(10); §5.4, Fig. 2] The central ASI operation — replacing a reference category with a different text-specified category — is never trained or evaluated. In Eq. (9), when category c_i is specified, f_ci = t_ci, but during training the text labels are the reference utterance's own labels: the Censored Learning strategy (Sec. 4.3) randomly drops categorical labels at 25% but never substitutes a conflicting label. Therefore the fuser in Eq. (10) only ever sees text embeddings t_ci that agree with the reference category; at test time, the input combination (t_ci='angry', reference neutral) is out-of-distribution. The hard gate only selects the branch; it does not guarantee that the fuser discards category information carried by the residual, nor that it trusts the text embedding. No experiment in Sec. 5 isolates conflicting prompt/reference combinations; DSA (Eq. 20) and RSA (Eq. 21) aggregate over categories wi
  2. [§4.2, Eqs. (6)–(8)] The disentangler does not enforce orthogonality between the residual subspace s_r and the named category subspaces. PAL pulls each s_ci toward its prototype, and L_recon reconstructs S from prototypes plus the quantized residual, but this does not prevent the residual from encoding category-identifying cues. If s_r contains such cues, Eq. (10) can reintroduce the reference category into the fused embedding even when the text asks for a different category, because the residual is always inherited from speech. The paper should provide a direct test — e.g., probe the residual embedding with a category classifier, or report DSA specifically for conflicting prompt/reference pairs — to show the residual is category-neutral in the relevant sense.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (2)] The notation \hS_{c_i} and \hS_{c_r} in Eq. (2) is not clearly connected to the later notation \hS_f in Eq. (10) and the fused latents f_ci in Eq. (9). Please align notation and state explicitly that Eq. (2) is the target behavior, not a learned module.
  2. [§5.1; Appendix B] DSA and RSA are central to the paper, but the appendix does not specify the architecture, training data, or label set of the frozen evaluators h_c, nor whether the evaluation prompts ever assign a text label different from the reference label. This information is needed to interpret the reported numbers.
  3. [Fig. 2(b)] The x-axis label 'text-descriptive style rate' is undefined. Clarify whether it is the fraction of test categories specified by text, and how the remaining categories are chosen.
  4. [Appendix A] The limitations section lists missing style dimensions and annotation coverage but does not mention the main limitation identified above: the model is only trained with text labels that agree with the reference, and conflicting-prompt behavior is untested. Adding this limitation, or better, fixing it, would considerably strengthen the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No central circularity; the main ASI claim is not reduced to a fitted value, but S-SIM uses AutoSIFT's own style extractor and the infiller training never presents conflicting text/reference labels, leaving an extrapolation gap rather than an equation-level circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central ASI claim is not reduced to its inputs by construction. DSA (Eq. 20) and RSA (Eq. 21) use category-specific evaluators trained independently on held-out real speech (Appendix F), so the headline control and preservation numbers are external to AutoSIFT's fitted parameters. The Style Disentangler and Infiller are trained with reconstruction losses (Eqs. 8, 10) and PAL (Eq. 6), which learn to decompose and recompose the reference style embedding; the text-specified branch in Eq. 9 is a hard gate, not a parameter fitted to the evaluated outcome. The main caveat is not circularity but an extrapolation gap: Censored Learning (Sec. 4.3) drops 25% of labels but never substitutes a conflicting text label, so during training a specified text category always agrees with the reference; the mismatched-label case central to 'arbitrary' infilling is out-of-distribution and is not explicitly isolated in Sec. 5. This is a generalization/validity concern, not an equation-level self-reference. S-SIM (Eq. 18) uses AutoSIFT's own style extractor Esty, a self-referential component for the preservation metric, but the ASI claims also rely on RSA and independent evaluators. Self-citations to ParaMETA [10] and ParaStyleTTS [2] supply the PAL loss and frozen text encoder respectively; they are component choices, not an imported uniqueness theorem, and the paper outperforms both baselines under the same protocol. Overall no prediction reduces to a fitted value or to a self-citation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

The framework depends on several modeling choices and a conceptual split between named categories and residual style. The most consequential is the untested assumption that the gated fusion trained against the reference style embedding will override a reference category when the text prompt asks for a different one. The residual style construct and prototypes are internal to the model and lack independent validation.

free parameters (5)
  • category subspace dimension d=48 = 48
    Hand-chosen for each of four categories; no principled justification; directly controls how much information each category subspace can carry (Section 4.2, Appendix F).
  • VQ codebook size K = not reported
    The residual codebook size is never stated; it determines how much non-categorical nuance the residual can preserve (Eq. 7).
  • VQ commitment beta = not reported
    The commitment weight in Eq. 7 is unspecified; it changes the trade-off between reconstruction fidelity and codebook utilization.
  • censored label drop rate = 25%
    Ad hoc choice for simulating missing text prompts during infiller training (Section 4.3); no sensitivity analysis.
  • loss weights for L_recon, L_PAL, L_VQ = implicitly 1.0
    Losses are summed without explicit weighting (Eq. 8); the balance affects disentanglement quality and reconstruction fidelity.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The global style embedding S is a sufficient statistic for all speaking-style information needed for reconstruction and control.
    The Style Extractor is trained with a flow-matching reconstruction objective (Eq. 3); there is no formal guarantee that the 192-d embedding captures all style-relevant information.
  • ad hoc to paper Linear projectors from the global style embedding S yield independent, semantically meaningful category subspaces.
    Eq. 4 assumes linear separability of style categories in the embedding space; t-SNE visualizations are illustrative, not a proof of independence.
  • ad hoc to paper A text-specified category can be swapped into the fused embedding while the reconstruction target remains the reference style embedding S.
    Eqs. 9-10; training labels match the reference speech, so the model is never explicitly trained with conflicting text and reference categories.
  • ad hoc to paper The residual style c_r is fully captured by the VQ codebook and is orthogonal to the named categories.
    Section 4.2 defines residual style as everything outside the taxonomy, but no orthogonality or completeness guarantee is provided.
invented entities (2)
  • Residual Style Category c_r no independent evidence
    purpose: Captures non-verbal prosody, timbre, breathiness, and other acoustic details outside the named style taxonomy.
    Introduced in Section 3.1 as a latent construct; no external measurement or falsifiable prediction is given beyond internal reconstruction and demo audio.
  • Style Prototypes P_ci no independent evidence
    purpose: Act as trainable semantic anchors for each class to ground category-specific subspaces.
    Defined in Section 4.2; their validity is only shown through the paper's own classification and reconstruction experiments.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16039 in / 12153 out tokens · 124819 ms · 2026-08-02T06:20:52.093361+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AutoSIFT: Automatic Style Sifting for Controllable Speech Generation with Arbitrary Style Infilling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3I23ZJVK

@misc{pith2026260712706,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AutoSIFT: Automatic Style Sifting for Controllable Speech Generation with Arbitrary Style Infilling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3I23ZJVK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.12706}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

State-of-the-art text-to-speech (TTS) models achieve impressive naturalness and expressiveness, yet fine-grained, disentangled control over speaking styles remains challenging. In professional scenarios such as film dubbing, game voice acting, and video content generation, users often need to modify a specific style category, such as emotion, age, or gender, while preserving all others. Existing style-controllable TTS methods typically rely on either text-described styles or speech-reference style transfer, making it difficult to jointly control explicit semantic attributes and preserve subtle, text-undescribed prosodic details. We propose AutoSIFT, a controllable speech generation framework for category-level style editing. AutoSIFT decomposes speaking style into known text-describable categories and unknown residual styles that capture non-verbal prosody and speaker-specific nuances. It consists of a generalized Style Disentangler, which extracts category-aware style prototypes from reference speech, and an Arbitrary Style Infiller, which selectively infills unspecified style categories from the reference. By replacing only text-specified style categories while preserving residual speech-derived styles, AutoSIFT enables natural, expressive, and highly customizable speech generation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.12706 by Chengkai Huang, Haowei Lou, Hye-Young Paik, Junda Wu, Lina Yao, Tong Yu, Wen Hu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of AutoSIFT. 1) A FM-DiT-based SC-TTS extracts a style embedding from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comprehensive evaluation of style control performance. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Screenshot of MOS Evaluation D Case Study Beyond quantitative assessment, AutoSIFT is designed to address practical needs in controllable speech generation. Its arbitrary style infilling capability is particularly useful in scenarios where users need to modify certain speaking-style categories while preserving styles from reference speech. In this section, we discuss several representative application scen… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Embedding comparison for Gender category. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Embedding comparison for Language category. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Embedding comparison for Emotion category. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Embedding comparison for Age category [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Screenshot of the supplementary AutoSIFT audio demo page. The demo includes reference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 10 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Prompttts 2: Describing and generating voices with text prompt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.02285, 2023

    Yichong Leng, Zhifang Guo, Kai Shen, Xu Tan, Zeqian Ju, Yanqing Liu, Yufei Liu, Dongchao Yang, Leying Zhang, Kaitao Song, et al. Prompttts 2: Describing and generating voices with text prompt.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.02285, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Parastyletts: Toward efficient and robust paralinguistic style control for expressive text-to-speech generation

    Haowei Lou, Hye-Young Paik, Wen Hu, and Lina Yao. Parastyletts: Toward efficient and robust paralinguistic style control for expressive text-to-speech generation. InProceedings of the 34th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pages 1979–1988, 2025

    1979

  3. [3]

    Yourtts: Towards zero-shot multi-speaker tts and zero-shot voice conversion for everyone

    Edresson Casanova, Julian Weber, Christopher D Shulby, Arnaldo Candido Junior, Eren Gölge, and Moacir A Ponti. Yourtts: Towards zero-shot multi-speaker tts and zero-shot voice conversion for everyone. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 2709–2720. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  4. [4]

    Indextts: An industrial-level controllable and efficient zero-shot text-to-speech system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05512, 2025

    Wei Deng, Siyi Zhou, Jingchen Shu, Jinchao Wang, and Lu Wang. Indextts: An industrial-level controllable and efficient zero-shot text-to-speech system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05512, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Autovc: Zero-shot voice style transfer with only autoencoder loss

    Kaizhi Qian, Yang Zhang, Shiyu Chang, Xuesong Yang, and Mark Hasegawa-Johnson. Autovc: Zero-shot voice style transfer with only autoencoder loss. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 5210–5219. PMLR, 2019

    2019

  6. [6]

    Speechsplit2

    Chak Ho Chan, Kaizhi Qian, Yang Zhang, and Mark Hasegawa-Johnson. Speechsplit2. 0: Unsupervised speech disentanglement for voice conversion without tuning autoencoder bottle- necks. InICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 6332–6336. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  7. [7]

    Cosyvoice: A scalable multilingual zero-shot text-to-speech synthesizer based on supervised semantic tokens.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.05407, 2024

    Zhihao Du, Qian Chen, Shiliang Zhang, Kai Hu, Heng Lu, Yexin Yang, Hangrui Hu, Siqi Zheng, Yue Gu, Ziyang Ma, et al. Cosyvoice: A scalable multilingual zero-shot text-to-speech synthesizer based on supervised semantic tokens.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.05407, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Cosyvoice 2: Scalable streaming speech synthesis with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10117, 2024

    Zhihao Du, Yuxuan Wang, Qian Chen, Xian Shi, Xiang Lv, Tianyu Zhao, Zhifu Gao, Yexin Yang, Changfeng Gao, Hui Wang, et al. Cosyvoice 2: Scalable streaming speech synthesis with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10117, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Cosyvoice 3: Towards in-the-wild speech generation via scaling-up and post-training.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.17589, 2025

    Zhihao Du, Changfeng Gao, Yuxuan Wang, Fan Yu, Tianyu Zhao, Hao Wang, Xiang Lv, Hui Wang, Chongjia Ni, Xian Shi, et al. Cosyvoice 3: Towards in-the-wild speech generation via scaling-up and post-training.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.17589, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Parameta: Towards learning disentan- gled paralinguistic speaking styles representations from speech

    Haowei Lou, Hye-Young Paik, Wen Hu, and Lina Yao. Parameta: Towards learning disentan- gled paralinguistic speaking styles representations from speech. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 40, pages 32311–32319, 2026

    2026

  11. [11]

    Clap learning audio concepts from natural language supervision

    Benjamin Elizalde, Soham Deshmukh, Mahmoud Al Ismail, and Huaming Wang. Clap learning audio concepts from natural language supervision. InICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2023. 10

    2023

  12. [12]

    Paraclap–towards a general language- audio model for computational paralinguistic tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07203, 2024

    Xin Jing, Andreas Triantafyllopoulos, and Björn Schuller. Paraclap–towards a general language- audio model for computational paralinguistic tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07203, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Loss-balanced task weighting to reduce negative transfer in multi-task learning

    Shengchao Liu, Yingyu Liang, and Anthony Gitter. Loss-balanced task weighting to reduce negative transfer in multi-task learning. InProceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 33, pages 9977–9978, 2019

    2019

  14. [14]

    A survey on multi-task learning.IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 34(12):5586–5609, 2021

    Yu Zhang and Qiang Yang. A survey on multi-task learning.IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 34(12):5586–5609, 2021

    2021

  15. [15]

    Prompttts++: Controlling speaker identity in prompt-based text-to-speech using natural language descriptions

    Reo Shimizu, Ryuichi Yamamoto, Masaya Kawamura, Yuma Shirahata, Hironori Doi, Tatsuya Komatsu, and Kentaro Tachibana. Prompttts++: Controlling speaker identity in prompt-based text-to-speech using natural language descriptions. InICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 12672–12676. IEEE, 2024

    2024

  16. [16]

    F5-tts: A fairytaler that fakes fluent and faithful speech with flow matching

    Yushen Chen, Zhikang Niu, Ziyang Ma, and et al. F5-tts: A fairytaler that fakes fluent and faithful speech with flow matching. InProceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 6255–6271, 2025

    2025

  17. [17]

    Prompttts: Controllable text-to-speech with text descriptions

    Zhifang Guo, Yichong Leng, Yihan Wu, Sheng Zhao, and Xu Tan. Prompttts: Controllable text-to-speech with text descriptions. InICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  18. [18]

    Naturalspeech 3: Zero-shot speech synthesis with factorized codec and diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03100, 2024

    Zeqian Ju, Yuancheng Wang, Kai Shen, Xu Tan, Detai Xin, Dongchao Yang, Yanqing Liu, Yichong Leng, Kaitao Song, Siliang Tang, et al. Naturalspeech 3: Zero-shot speech synthesis with factorized codec and diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03100, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Yinghao Aaron Li, Cong Han, Vinay Raghavan, Gavin Mischler, and Nima Mesgarani. Styletts 2: Towards human-level text-to-speech through style diffusion and adversarial training with large speech language models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:19594–19621, 2023

    2023

  20. [20]

    Signal estimation from modified short-time fourier transform.IEEE Transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing, 32(2):236–243, 1984

    Daniel Griffin and Jae Lim. Signal estimation from modified short-time fourier transform.IEEE Transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing, 32(2):236–243, 1984

    1984

  21. [21]

    Hifi-gan: Generative adversarial networks for efficient and high fidelity speech synthesis.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:17022–17033, 2020

    Jungil Kong, Jaehyeon Kim, and Jaekyoung Bae. Hifi-gan: Generative adversarial networks for efficient and high fidelity speech synthesis.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:17022–17033, 2020

    2020

  22. [22]

    Flow matching for generative modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky TQ Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximilian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 4195–4205, 2023

    2023

  24. [24]

    Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    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

  25. [25]

    Fastspeech 2: Fast and high-quality end-to-end text to speech.arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.04558, 2020

    Yi Ren, Chenxu Hu, Xu Tan, Tao Qin, Sheng Zhao, Zhou Zhao, and Tie-Yan Liu. Fastspeech 2: Fast and high-quality end-to-end text to speech.arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.04558, 2020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  26. [26]

    Neural discrete representation learning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    Aaron Van Den Oord, Oriol Vinyals, et al. Neural discrete representation learning.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  27. [27]

    Chinese mandarin female corpus

    Databaker. Chinese mandarin female corpus. https://en.data-baker.com/datasets/ freeDatasets/, 2020. Accessed: 2023-04-20

    2020

  28. [28]

    The lj speech dataset

    Keith Ito and Linda Johnson. The lj speech dataset. https://keithito.com/ LJ-Speech-Dataset/, 2017

    2017

  29. [29]

    Seen and unseen emotional style transfer for voice conversion with a new emotional speech dataset

    Kun Zhou, Berrak Sisman, Rui Liu, and Haizhou Li. Seen and unseen emotional style transfer for voice conversion with a new emotional speech dataset. InICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 920–924. IEEE, 2021. 11

    2021

  30. [30]

    Crema-d: Crowd-sourced emotional multimodal actors dataset.IEEE transactions on affective computing, 5(4):377–390, 2014

    Houwei Cao, David G Cooper, Michael K Keutmann, Ruben C Gur, Ani Nenkova, and Ragini Verma. Crema-d: Crowd-sourced emotional multimodal actors dataset.IEEE transactions on affective computing, 5(4):377–390, 2014

    2014

  31. [31]

    Common phone: A multilingual dataset for robust acoustic modelling

    Philipp Klumpp, Tomas Arias, Paula Andrea Pérez-Toro, Elmar Noeth, and Juan Orozco- Arroyave. Common phone: A multilingual dataset for robust acoustic modelling. InProceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 763–768, 2022

    2022

  32. [32]

    Genshin voice: A multi-lingual voice dataset from Genshin Impact

    Simon3000. Genshin voice: A multi-lingual voice dataset from Genshin Impact. https:// huggingface.co/datasets/simon3000/genshin-voice, 2025. Hugging Face Datasets

    2025

  33. [33]

    Mpnet: Masked and permuted pre-training for language understanding.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:16857–16867, 2020

    Kaitao Song, Xu Tan, Tao Qin, Jianfeng Lu, and Tie-Yan Liu. Mpnet: Masked and permuted pre-training for language understanding.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:16857–16867, 2020

    2020

  34. [34]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 8748–8763. PmLR, 2021

    2021

  35. [35]

    Natural tts synthesis by conditioning wavenet on mel spectrogram predictions

    Jonathan Shen, Ruoming Pang, Ron J Weiss, Mike Schuster, Navdeep Jaitly, Zongheng Yang, Zhifeng Chen, Yu Zhang, Yuxuan Wang, Rj Skerrv-Ryan, et al. Natural tts synthesis by conditioning wavenet on mel spectrogram predictions. In2018 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP), pages 4779–4783. IEEE, 2018

    2018

  36. [36]

    Conditional variational autoencoder with adversar- ial learning for end-to-end text-to-speech

    Jaehyeon Kim, Jungil Kong, and Juhee Son. Conditional variational autoencoder with adversar- ial learning for end-to-end text-to-speech. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 5530–5540. PMLR, 2021

    2021

  37. [37]

    terrified

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017. 12 Supplementary Material A Limitations AutoSIFT currently focuses on a predefined set of text-describable style categories, such as gender, age, emotion, and language. While these categories cover common controllable speech generation scenarios,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017