Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

AudioGen-Omni: A Unified Multimodal Diffusion Transformer for Video-Synchronized Audio, Speech, and Song Generation

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 ↗

Pith's one-line read A single diffusion transformer claims to generate video-synchronized audio, speech, and song, setting new state-of-the-art results on each task.

desk verdict Real unified model with strong V2S numbers, but undisclosed speech conditioning and unsupported song claims make the SOTA headline premature. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.00733 v4 pith:PNTJRUHL submitted 2025-08-01 cs.SD cs.CVcs.MMeess.AS

Le Wang , Jun Wang , Chunyu Qiang , Feng Deng , Chen Zhang , Di Zhang , Kun Gai This is my paper
classification cs.SDcs.CVcs.MMeess.AS
keywords multimodaldiffusiontransformervideo-to-audiogenerationvideo-to-speechsongaudio-visualsynchronizationflowmatchinglyrics-transcriptionencoderpositionalembedding
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

AudioGen-Omni is a single multimodal diffusion transformer trained to produce general audio, speech, and song from text, video, or both, synchronised to the visual track. The paper claims it is the first unified framework to cover all three audio types with flexible conditioning, and that one checkpoint reaches state-of-the-art quality on text-to-audio, video-to-audio, video-to-speech, and song generation. The main technical bets are a duration-free lyrics-transcription encoder and phase-aligned anisotropic positional infusion (PAAPI), which applies rotary position embeddings selectively to time-structured modalities. If correct, a single model replaces separate audio, speech, and song systems, and video-to-speech intelligibility improves substantially at an inference cost of about 1.9 seconds for 8 seconds of audio.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the multimodal diffusion transformer block with joint attention: query, key, and value vectors from text, audio, and video are concatenated, attended over together, and then split back by modality, so every stream can read every other stream in one pass. Three mechanisms carry the argument. The lyrics-transcription encoder maps graphemes and phonemes to dense frame-level tokens using VoiceBPE tokenization and ConvNeXt refinement, with no phoneme-duration supervision. PAAPI (phase-aligned anisotropic positional infusion) adds rotary position embeddings only to video, audio, and time-aligned text streams, leaving atemporal text with plain positional embeddings, so time-indexed positions line up across streams during joint attention. Conditional flow matching trains a velocity field with variable-length masking, so the model learns to work with any subset of conditioning inputs at inference.

What would settle it

Run the model on the LRS3 test set twice: once with only the silent video as conditioning and once with the ground-truth transcript added. If the transcript-free WER is much higher than 17.56 while the transcript-conditioned WER matches it, the claim of visual speech inference collapses; if both are near 17.56, the video-only premise holds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a single flow-matching diffusion transformer with joint attention over video, text, and audio latents can be trained end-to-end on a mixture of video-text-audio, audio-text, and song-lyrics corpora, and that this joint training yields state-of-the-art results across generation tasks. Concretely, on VGGSound the model reports Fréchet distances of 58.766 (PaSST) and 6.292 (PANNs) with a DeSync of 0.450 seconds; on LRS3 and LRS2 it reports word error rates of 17.56 and 17.75, below the previous best video-to-speech systems; and the same checkpoint handles song generation through a lyrics-transcription encoder. The authors attribute these results to unfreezing all modalities, masking absent inputs during training, and giving temporally structured streams their own rotational positional phase.

Load-bearing premise

The speed and quality claims stand on the assumption that the video-to-speech evaluations feed the model only the silent video, not the ground-truth transcript or lyrics; the paper never states that explicitly, and if the assumption is false the central comparison against other video-to-speech systems is invalid.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single 1.55-billion-parameter checkpoint covers text-to-audio, video-to-audio, video-to-speech, and song generation, so downstream video production can drop task-specific pipelines.
  • Video-to-speech intelligibility on LRS3 improves from a previous best WER of 30.37 to 17.56, a large step toward lip-synchronised dubbing.
  • Generating 8 seconds of audio takes about 1.91 seconds at 25 sampling steps, making near-real-time use plausible.
  • Because absent inputs are masked during training, the same model can be prompted with text only, video only, or both, without task-specific fine-tuning.
  • Speaker identity is better preserved: SECS rises to 0.691 (GE2E) and 0.527 (VoxSim) on LRS3 compared with prior video-to-speech methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the reported video-to-speech numbers were produced with ground-truth transcripts available as conditioning, the WER gain would reflect text-to-speech rather than visual speech inference; the paper does not explicitly rule this out, so a transcript-free rerun is the decisive check.
  • The paper presents no quantitative song-generation benchmark, so the 'song' claim currently rests on the lyric dataset and encoder design rather than a measured comparison against song-synthesis baselines.
  • The same joint-attention architecture could be turned toward video generation, as the conclusion hints, by replacing the audio latent target with a visual one; the PAAPI alignment mechanism would then need to synchronise text and audio to the generated frames.
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. The paper proposes AudioGen-Omni, a 1.55B-parameter multimodal diffusion transformer for unified generation of general audio, speech, and song from flexible combinations of video, text, lyrics, and other conditions. The method combines a lyrics-transcription encoder, a joint attention mechanism, and a phase-aligned anisotropic positional infusion (PAAPI) scheme, and is trained jointly on large video-text-audio corpora with input masking and conditional flow matching. Experiments cover video-to-audio quality on VGGSound, video-to-speech quality on LRS3/LRS2, and speaker similarity on LRS3, with a reported inference time of 1.91 seconds for 8 seconds of audio. The paper claims state-of-the-art results on Text-to-Audio/Speech/Song tasks and the first unified framework for these generation types.

Significance. If the claims are substantiated, AudioGen-Omni would be a notable step toward a single architecture for general audio, speech, and singing generation with flexible multimodal conditioning, and the reported inference speed is practically attractive. The paper is also commendable for integrating a large-scale data pipeline, standard objective metrics, and a wide comparison set. However, the evidence as submitted is not yet sufficient for the central claims: the video-to-speech evaluation protocol is underspecified in a way that could invalidate the headline WER numbers, song generation is never quantitatively evaluated, the temporal-alignment metric shares the same pretrained network used for conditioning, and the claimed text-to-audio state of the art is not benchmarked. The architecture itself is reasonable and the results are promising, but the missing protocol and evaluation gaps are load-bearing.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2.2, Table 2] The LRS3/LRS2 speech results are presented as video-to-speech performance, but the evaluation section never states which conditioning inputs were provided at inference. Section 3.3 explicitly permits arbitrary subsets of conditioning inputs, and Section 3.2 introduces a lyrics-transcription encoder that consumes grapheme/phoneme sequences. If the ground-truth transcription or lyrics were fed to the model, the reported WER of 17.56/17.75 would reflect text-conditioned speech generation rather than visual speech inference, and the comparison against DiffV2S and Face2Voices, which must infer speech content from video alone, would be invalid. The exact conditioning configuration for Table 2 must be disclosed, and ideally an ablation with and without transcript conditioning should be provided.
  2. [§4.2, Abstract] The abstract and introduction claim state-of-the-art results on Text-to-Audio/Speech/Song tasks and the first unified framework that generates song, but Section 4 contains no quantitative song-generation evaluation: there is no song benchmark table, no singing-quality metric, no lyric-intelligibility metric, and no comparison with song-generation baselines. The only song evidence is the demo link. Without a defined song evaluation protocol and quantitative results, the song-generation contribution and the corresponding SOTA claim cannot be assessed. A dedicated song evaluation with appropriate metrics and baselines is needed.
  3. [§4.1 vs §3.4.1] The temporal-alignment evaluation is partially circular. Section 4.1 uses the Synchformer DeSync score as the primary audio-visual synchronization metric, while Section 3.4.1 states that Synchformer's 24 FPS visual features are extracted and integrated into the model's global conditioning vector. The model is therefore trained and conditioned to align with Synchformer representations and then evaluated by the same pretrained network. This is especially consequential because the DeSync gap between AudioGen-Omni (0.450) and MMAudio (0.442) in Table 1 is very small. An independent temporal-alignment metric or human evaluation of synchronization is required to support the alignment claims.
  4. [Abstract, Table 1] The claim of state-of-the-art results on text-to-audio tasks is not supported by the presented evidence. Table 1 reports only VGGSound video-to-audio results; no text-to-audio benchmark such as AudioCaps or Clotho is included. Moreover, even on VGGSound, AudioGen-Omni is not uniformly better than MMAudio-L-44.1kHz: it improves FDPaSST and IS but is worse on FDPANNs (6.292 vs 4.72), KL divergence (1.556 vs 1.40), IB-score (29.261 vs 33.22), and DeSync (0.450 vs 0.442). The SOTA statement should be restricted to the settings actually measured, and the reported differences should be accompanied by significance or variance information.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2, References] Several related-work citations appear to be mismatched: SongCreator is cited as Lei et al. (2020), which is an infectious-disease paper; MelodyLM is cited as Li et al. (2023), which points to an NTIRE super-resolution challenge paper; Freestyle is cited as Ning et al. (2006), which is an aluminum-alloys paper; and Yue is cited as Yuan et al. (2017), an energy-demand forecasting paper. These references need to be corrected.
  2. [§4.2.2] The sentence "Our model outperforms existing VTS systems" appears to contain a typo; it should probably read V2S systems.
  3. [§3.4.1 vs §3.2] The text encoder is described as T5-Base in Section 3.2 but as Flan-T5 in Section 3.4.1 and Figure 1. Please clarify which encoder is actually used.
  4. [§4.1] The DeSync score is described as estimating temporal misalignment in seconds, but Synchformer is a classifier over offset classes; the paper should specify how the offset class distribution is converted into a seconds-valued score and whether this conversion is the same as in prior work.
  5. [§4.2.2] The observation that the model surpasses ground-truth audio in UTMOS and DNSMOS is attributed to clean-speech generation, but these are non-intrusive quality predictors and may favor clean synthetic audio over noisy real recordings. The claim should be framed more cautiously, and a human listening test would strengthen it.
  6. [Reproducibility] No code, model weights, or demo evaluation details are provided beyond the demo link. For a system paper of this scope, releasing the inference code or at least a detailed evaluation configuration would greatly improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Temporal-alignment evaluation is partially circular: Synchformer both provides conditioning features and computes the DeSync metric.

  1. other [Section 3.4.1 (Global Conditioning) and Section 4.1 (Temporal Alignment)]
    "To improve synchronization, we incorporate high-frame-rate (24 FPS) visual features extracted by the Synchformer encoder Iashin et al. (2024), which correlate strongly with audio events. These features are upsampled and integrated into the global conditioning vector to produce a frame-aligned conditioning signal. [...] To evaluate audio-visual synchronization, we adopt the DeSync score predicted by Synchformer Iashin et al. (2024), which estimates the temporal misalignment (in seconds) between audio and video."

    The claimed audio-visual alignment is measured by the same network used to build the conditioning signal. Section 3.4.1 injects Synchformer's 24 FPS alignment features into the global conditioning; Section 4.1 uses Synchformer's DeSync as the temporal-alignment metric. The generator is therefore conditioned on the very synchronization criterion on which it is scored, so a low DeSync may reflect the model matching Synchformer's alignment preferences rather than an independent measure of audio-visual synchronization. This makes the 'precise audio-visual alignment' claim partially self-confirming and the DeSync comparison not fully external.

full rationale

The only concrete circular step is the Synchformer/DeSync coupling: the same pretrained synchronization network supplies frame-aligned conditioning features (Section 3.4.1) and computes the temporal-alignment metric (Section 4.1). This partially reduces the alignment claim to matching the evaluator's own features. No other demonstrated circularity exists. The Kling-Foley audio codec is a self-cited component but is not used as a scoring metric and does not by itself force the reported results. WER, UTMOS/DNSMOS, SECS, FD, KL, IS, and IB-score are computed with external models (Whisper, UTMOS/DNSMOS, GE2E/VoxSim, PaSST/PANNs/ImageBind) and are independent of the model's conditioning. The LRS3/LRS2 speech-evaluation protocol is ambiguous about whether the ground-truth transcription was masked, which is a reporting/validity concern rather than a demonstrated circular step; the paper does not state that the transcript was supplied, so it cannot be cited as a reduction by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on several unstated or lightly validated premises. The most important is that Synchformer's features are a valid alignment signal and that its DeSync score is an independent measure of that alignment; the paper's own protocol makes the metric non-independent. Evaluation conditions, especially whether text is given in the speech tests, are not fully disclosed. Hyperparameters such as guidance scale, integration start, step count, and mask rates are set by hand without ablations.

free parameters (5)
  • Classifier-free guidance scale = 4.5
    Inference hyperparameter chosen without reported ablation (Section 4, Training Details).
  • Flow integration start time t = 0.05
    Fixed at inference; no sensitivity analysis reported (Section 3.4.2).
  • Number of sampling steps = 25
    Set for all experiments; no step-count ablation is shown (Section 4).
  • Input masking drop rates = not reported
    Joint training relies on masking missing inputs (Section 3.3), but per-modality mask probabilities are not specified; these directly control the conditioning behavior.
  • Data mixture proportions = not reported
    The mixture of VGGSound, Pandas70M, InternVid, AudioCaps, Clotho, LibriTTS, LJ Speech, WavCaps, and the in-house song corpus is not quantified; this affects the balance between tasks.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Synchformer 24 FPS visual features are strongly correlated with audio events and provide a valid frame-level alignment signal.
    Introduced in Section 3.4.1; the synchronization capability of the model is built on this premise, and the same network is used for evaluation (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption Flow matching objective with Euler integration and t=0.05 start yields high-quality samples.
    Standard practice, but the specific choices are not derived or ablated (Section 3.4.2).
  • domain assumption The Mel-VAE codec (Kling-Foley) reconstructs general audio, speech, and singing with sufficient fidelity at a 43 Hz latent rate.
    The whole generation operates in this latent space; no reconstruction metrics are reported for song or speech (Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption Pseudo-labels from Qwen-omni, Whisper, and FunASR are accurate enough to train on.
    Data pipeline in Section 3.1; errors in captions and transcriptions propagate to the model.
  • domain assumption The VGGSound train/test split is respected.
    Standard benchmark expectation, but not explicitly confirmed in the paper (Section 4.2.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AudioGen-Omni: A Unified Multimodal Diffusion Transformer for Video-Synchronized Audio, Speech, and Song Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PNTJRUHL

@misc{pith2026250800733,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AudioGen-Omni: A Unified Multimodal Diffusion Transformer for Video-Synchronized Audio, Speech, and Song Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PNTJRUHL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.00733}
}
read the original abstract

We present AudioGen-Omni - a unified approach based on multimodal diffusion transformers (MMDit), capable of generating high-fidelity audio, speech, and song coherently synchronized with the input video. AudioGen-Omni introduces a novel joint training paradigm that seamlessly integrates large-scale video-text-audio corpora, enabling a model capable of generating semantically rich, acoustically diverse audio conditioned on multimodal inputs and adaptable to a wide range of audio generation tasks. AudioGen-Omni employs a unified lyrics-transcription encoder that encodes graphemes and phonemes from both song and spoken inputs into dense frame-level representations. Dense frame-level representations are fused using an AdaLN-based joint attention mechanism enhanced with phase-aligned anisotropic positional infusion (PAAPI), wherein RoPE is selectively applied to temporally structured modalities to ensure precise and robust cross-modal alignment. By unfreezing all modalities and masking missing inputs, AudioGen-Omni mitigates the semantic constraints of text-frozen paradigms, enabling effective cross-modal conditioning. This joint training approach enhances audio quality, semantic alignment, and lip-sync accuracy, while also achieving state-of-the-art results on Text-to-Audio/Speech/Song tasks. With an inference time of 1.91 seconds for 8 seconds of audio, it offers substantial improvements in both efficiency and generality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.00733 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the AudioGen-Omni flow-prediction network. Video conditions, text conditions, lyric/transcript [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Mel-spectrogram visualization compared with Ground Truth (GT) speech demonstrates that the proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. JoVA: Unified Multimodal Learning for Joint Video-Audio Generation and Editing

    cs.CV 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A dual-branch diffusion transformer with joint video-audio self-attention and a keypoint-based mouth-area loss reports top lip-sync and speech metrics on two benchmarks.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    VoxSim: A perceptual voice similarity dataset

    Junseok Ahn, Youkyum Kim, Yeunju Choi, Doyeop Kwak, Ji-Hoon Kim, Seongkyu Mun, and Joon Son Chung. V oxsim: A perceptual voice similarity dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.18505,

    work page Pith review arXiv

  2. [3]

    Beyond efficiency: A systematic survey of resource-efficient large language models

    Guangji Bai, Zheng Chai, Chen Ling, Shiyu Wang, Jiaying Lu, Nan Zhang, Tingwei Shi, Ziyang Yu, Mengdan Zhu, Yifei Zhang, et al. Beyond efficiency: A systematic survey of resource-efficient large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.00625,

    arXiv

  3. [4]

    Vggsound: A large-scale audio-visual dataset

    Honglie Chen, Weidi Xie, Andrea Vedaldi, and Andrew Zisserman. Vggsound: A large-scale audio-visual dataset. In ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pp. 721–725. IEEE,

    work page 2020

  4. [8]

    Clotho: An audio captioning dataset

    Konstantinos Drossos, Samuel Lipping, and Tuomas Virtanen. Clotho: An audio captioning dataset. InICASSP 2020- 2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pp. 736–740. IEEE,

    work page 2020

  5. [9]

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

    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,

    arXiv

  6. [10]

    Vid2speech: speech reconstruction from silent video

    Ariel Ephrat and Shmuel Peleg. Vid2speech: speech reconstruction from silent video. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 5095–5099. IEEE,

    work page 2017

  7. [11]

    Funasr: A fundamental end-to-end speech recognition toolkit

    Zhifu Gao, Zerui Li, Jiaming Wang, Haoneng Luo, Xian Shi, Mengzhe Chen, Yabin Li, Lingyun Zuo, Zhi- hao Du, Zhangyu Xiao, et al. Funasr: A fundamental end-to-end speech recognition toolkit. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11013,

    arXiv

  8. [12]

    Ace-step: A step towards music generation foundation model

    Junmin Gong, Sean Zhao, Sen Wang, Shengyuan Xu, and Joe Guo. Ace-step: A step towards music generation foundation model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.00045,

    arXiv

Show all 36 references
  1. [13]

    Effect of clustering on the me- chanical properties of sic particulate-reinforced aluminum alloy 2024 metal matrix composites

    Soon-Jik Hong, Hong-Moule Kim, Dae Huh, C Suryanarayana, and Byong Sun Chun. Effect of clustering on the me- chanical properties of sic particulate-reinforced aluminum alloy 2024 metal matrix composites. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 347(1-2):198–204,

    2024

  2. [15]

    Audiocaps: Generating captions for audios in the wild

    Chris Dongjoo Kim, Byeongchang Kim, Hyunmin Lee, and Gunhee Kim. Audiocaps: Generating captions for audios in the wild. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Compu- tational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1...

    2019

  3. [16]

    Efficient training of audio transformers with patchout

    Khaled Koutini, Jan Schl ¨uter, Hamid Eghbal-Zadeh, and Gerhard Widmer. Efficient training of audio transformers with patchout. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.05069,

    arXiv

  4. [19]

    Ntire 2023 challenge on efficient super-resolution: Methods and results

    Yawei Li, Yulun Zhang, Radu Timofte, Luc Van Gool, Lei Yu, Youwei Li, Xinpeng Li, Ting Jiang, Qi Wu, Mingyan Han, et al. Ntire 2023 challenge on efficient super-resolution: Methods and results. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition...

    2023

  5. [20]

    Flow matching for generative modeling

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

    arXiv

  6. [21]

    Audioldm: Text-to-audio generation with latent diffusion models

    Haohe Liu, Zehua Chen, Yi Yuan, Xinhao Mei, Xubo Liu, Danilo Mandic, Wenwu Wang, and Mark D Plumbley. Audioldm: Text-to-audio generation with latent diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12503,

    arXiv

  7. [22]

    Svts: Scalable video-to- speech synthesis

    Rodrigo Mira, Alexandros Haliassos, Stavros Petridis, Bj ¨orn W Schuller, and Maja Pantic. Svts: Scalable video-to- speech synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.02058,

    arXiv

  8. [23]

    Effect of large cold deformation on characteristics of age-strengthening of 2024 aluminum alloys

    Ai-Lin Ning, Zhi-Yi Liu, and Su-Min Zeng. Effect of large cold deformation on characteristics of age-strengthening of 2024 aluminum alloys. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 16(5):1121–1128,

    2024

  9. [24]

    Egosonics: Generating synchronized audio for silent egocentric videos

    Aashish Rai and Srinath Sridhar. Egosonics: Generating synchronized audio for silent egocentric videos. In 2025 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), pp. 4935–4946. IEEE,

    2025

  10. [25]

    Dnsmos: A non-intrusive perceptual objective speech quality metric to evaluate noise suppressors

    Chandan KA Reddy, Vishak Gopal, and Ross Cutler. Dnsmos: A non-intrusive perceptual objective speech quality metric to evaluate noise suppressors. In ICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 6493–6497. IEEE,

    2021

  11. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02152,

    arXiv

  12. [27]

    Dualdub: Video-to-soundtrack generation via joint speech and background audio synthesis

    Wenjie Tian, Xinfa Zhu, Haohe Liu, Zhixian Zhao, Zihao Chen, Chaofan Ding, Xinhan Di, Junjie Zheng, and Lei Xie. Dualdub: Video-to-soundtrack generation via joint speech and background audio synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.10109, 2025a. Zeyue Tian, Yizhu Jin, Zhaoyang Liu...

    arXiv

  13. [29]

    Generalized end-to-end loss for speaker verification

    Li Wan, Quan Wang, Alan Papir, and Ignacio Lopez Moreno. Generalized end-to-end loss for speaker verification. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 4879–4883. IEEE,

    2018

  14. [31]

    Internvid: A large-scale video-text dataset for multimodal understanding and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06942, 2023b

    Yi Wang, Yinan He, Yizhuo Li, Kunchang Li, Jiashuo Yu, Xin Ma, Xinhao Li, Guo Chen, Xinyuan Chen, Yaohui Wang, et al. Internvid: A large-scale video-text dataset for multimodal understanding and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06942, 2023b. 11 Yongqi Wang, Wenxiang Guo, R...

    arXiv

  15. [32]

    Jin Xu, Zhifang Guo, Jinzheng He, Hangrui Hu, Ting He, Shuai Bai, Keqin Chen, Jialin Wang, Yang Fan, Kai Dang, et al. Qwen2. 5-omni technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20215,

    arXiv

  16. [33]

    Forecasting china’s regional energy demand by 2030: A bayesian approach

    Xiao-Chen Yuan, Xun Sun, Weigang Zhao, Zhifu Mi, Bing Wang, and Yi-Ming Wei. Forecasting china’s regional energy demand by 2030: A bayesian approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127:85–95,

  17. [34]

    Libritts: A corpus derived from librispeech for text-to-speech

    Heiga Zen, Viet Dang, Rob Clark, Yu Zhang, Ron J Weiss, Ye Jia, Zhifeng Chen, and Yonghui Wu. Libritts: A corpus derived from librispeech for text-to-speech. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.02882,

    1904 arXiv

  18. [36]

    Fo- leycrafter: Bring silent videos to life with lifelike and synchronized sounds

    Yiming Zhang, Yicheng Gu, Yanhong Zeng, Zhening Xing, Yuancheng Wang, Zhizheng Wu, and Kai Chen. Fo- leycrafter: Bring silent videos to life with lifelike and synchronized sounds. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.01494 ,

    arXiv

  19. [2003]

    Synchformer: Efficient synchronization from sparse cues

    Vladimir Iashin, Weidi Xie, Esa Rahtu, and Andrew Zisserman. Synchformer: Efficient synchronization from sparse cues. In ICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 5325–5329. IEEE,

    2024

  20. [2017]

    Temporally aligned audio for video with autoregression

    Ilpo Viertola, Vladimir Iashin, and Esa Rahtu. Temporally aligned audio for video with autoregression. In ICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pp. 1–5. IEEE,

    2025

  21. [2018]

    Neural codec language models are zero-shot text to speech synthesizers

    Chengyi Wang, Sanyuan Chen, Yu Wu, Ziqiang Zhang, Long Zhou, Shujie Liu, Zhuo Chen, Yanqing Liu, Huaming Wang, Jinyu Li, et al. Neural codec language models are zero-shot text to speech synthesizers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.02111, 2023a. Heng Wang, Jianbo Ma, Santiago Pascua...

    arXiv

  22. [2019]

    Deepaudio-v1: Towards multi- modal multi-stage end-to-end video to speech and audio generation

    Haomin Zhang, Chang Liu, Junjie Zheng, Zihao Chen, Chaofan Ding, and Xinhan Di. Deepaudio-v1: Towards multi- modal multi-stage end-to-end video to speech and audio generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22265,

    arXiv

  23. [2020]

    Panda-70m: Captioning 70m videos with multiple cross-modality teachers

    Tsai-Shien Chen, Aliaksandr Siarohin, Willi Menapace, Ekaterina Deyneka, Hsiang-wei Chao, Byung Eun Jeon, Yuwei Fang, Hsin-Ying Lee, Jian Ren, Ming-Hsuan Yang, et al. Panda-70m: Captioning 70m videos with multiple cross-modality teachers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confere...

    arXiv

  24. [2021]

    Audiogen: Textually guided audio generation

    9 Felix Kreuk, Gabriel Synnaeve, Adam Polyak, Uriel Singer, Alexandre D ´efossez, Jade Copet, Devi Parikh, Yaniv Taigman, and Yossi Adi. Audiogen: Textually guided audio generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.15352,

    arXiv

  25. [2022]

    Black Forest Labs, Stephen Batifol, Andreas Blattmann, Frederic Boesel, Saksham Consul, Cyril Diagne, Tim Dock- horn, Jack English, Zion English, Patrick Esser, et al. Flux. 1 kontext: Flow matching for in-context image genera- tion and editing in latent space. arXiv preprint ...

    arXiv

  26. [2023]

    Jukebox: A generative model for music

    Prafulla Dhariwal, Heewoo Jun, Christine Payne, Jong Wook Kim, Alec Radford, and Ilya Sutskever. Jukebox: A generative model for music. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00341,

    2005 arXiv

  27. [2024]

    Seed-tts: A family of high-quality versatile speech generation models

    Philip Anastassiou, Jiawei Chen, Jitong Chen, Yuanzhe Chen, Zhuo Chen, Ziyi Chen, Jian Cong, Lelai Deng, Chuang Ding, Lu Gao, et al. Seed-tts: A family of high-quality versatile speech generation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02430,

    arXiv

  28. [2025]

    Diffv2s: Diffusion-based video-to-speech synthesis with vision- guided speaker embedding

    Jeongsoo Choi, Joanna Hong, and Yong Man Ro. Diffv2s: Diffusion-based video-to-speech synthesis with vision- guided speaker embedding. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pp. 7812–7821, 2023a. 8 Jeongsoo Choi, Minsu Kim, and Yong Man Ro...

    arXiv

Pith tools

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