14.7SDJun 5Code
CodecFake+: Codec-Based Resynthesized Data as a Proxy for Detecting CodecFake SpeechXuanjun Chen, Jiawei Du, Haibin Wu et al.
With the rapid advancement of neural audio codecs, codec-based speech generation (CoSG) systems have become highly powerful. Unfortunately, CoSG also enables the creation of highly realistic deepfake speech, making it easier to mimic an individual's voice and spread misinformation. We refer to this emerging deepfake speech generated by CoSG systems as CodecFake. Detecting such CodecFake is an urgent challenge, yet most existing systems primarily focus on detecting fake speech generated by traditional speech synthesis models. In this paper, we introduce CodecFake+, a large-scale dataset designed to advance CodecFake detection. To our knowledge, CodecFake+ is the largest dataset encompassing the most diverse range of codec architectures. The training set is generated through re-synthesis using 31 publicly available open-source codec models, while the evaluation set includes web-sourced data from 17 advanced CoSG models. We also propose a comprehensive taxonomy that categorizes codecs by their root components: vector quantizer, auxiliary objectives, and decoder types. Our proposed dataset and taxonomy enable detailed analysis at multiple levels to discern the key factors for successful CodecFake detection. At the individual codec level, we validate the effectiveness of using codec re-synthesized speech (CoRS) as training data for large-scale CodecFake detection. At the taxonomy level, we show that detection performance is strongest when the re-synthesis model incorporates disentanglement auxiliary objectives or a frequency-domain decoder. Furthermore, from the perspective of using all the CoRS training data, we show that our proposed taxonomy can be used to select better training data for improving detection performance. Overall, we envision that CodecFake+ will be a valuable resource for both general and fine-grained exploration to develop better anti-spoofing models against CodecFake.
13.0CLMay 27, 2025
Loquacious Set: 25,000 Hours of Transcribed and Diverse English Speech Recognition Data for Research and Commercial UseTitouan Parcollet, Yuan Tseng, Shucong Zhang et al. · cambridge
Automatic speech recognition (ASR) research is driven by the availability of common datasets between industrial researchers and academics, encouraging comparisons and evaluations. LibriSpeech, despite its long success as an ASR benchmark, is now limited by its size and focus on clean, read speech, leading to near-zero word error rates. More recent datasets, including MOSEL, YODAS, Gigaspeech, OWSM, Libriheavy or People's Speech suffer from major limitations including licenses that researchers in the industry cannot use, unreliable transcriptions, incorrect audio data, or the lack of evaluation sets. This work presents the Loquacious Set, a 25,000-hour curated collection of commercially usable English speech. Featuring hundreds of thousands of speakers with diverse accents and a wide range of speech types (read, spontaneous, talks, clean, noisy), the Loquacious Set is designed to work for academics and researchers in the industry to build ASR systems in real-world scenarios.
8.0ASMay 28, 2025
Evaluation of LLMs in Speech is Often Flawed: Test Set Contamination in Large Language Models for Speech RecognitionYuan Tseng, Titouan Parcollet, Rogier van Dalen et al. · cambridge
Recent work suggests that large language models (LLMs) can improve performance of speech tasks compared to existing systems. To support their claims, results on LibriSpeech and Common Voice are often quoted. However, this work finds that a substantial amount of the LibriSpeech and Common Voice evaluation sets appear in public LLM pretraining corpora. This calls into question the reliability of findings drawn from these two datasets. To measure contamination impact, LLMs trained with/without contamination are compared. A contaminated LLM is more likely to generate test sentences it has seen during training. Then, speech recognisers based on LLMs are compared. They show only subtle error rate differences if the LLM is contaminated, but assign significantly higher probabilities to transcriptions seen during LLM training. Results show that LLM outputs can be biased by tiny amounts of data contamination, highlighting the importance of evaluating LLM-based speech systems with held-out data.