Ke Wang

h-index3
2papers
16citations

2 Papers

7.0SDMar 14, 2025
Exploring the Potential of Large Multimodal Models as Effective Alternatives for Pronunciation Assessment

Ke Wang, Lei He, Kun Liu et al.

Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have demonstrated exceptional performance across a wide range of domains. This paper explores their potential in pronunciation assessment tasks, with a particular focus on evaluating the capabilities of the Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) model, specifically GPT-4o. Our study investigates its ability to process speech and audio for pronunciation assessment across multiple levels of granularity and dimensions, with an emphasis on feedback generation and scoring. For our experiments, we use the publicly available Speechocean762 dataset. The evaluation focuses on two key aspects: multi-level scoring and the practicality of the generated feedback. Scoring results are compared against the manual scores provided in the Speechocean762 dataset, while feedback quality is assessed using Large Language Models (LLMs). The findings highlight the effectiveness of integrating LMMs with traditional methods for pronunciation assessment, offering insights into the model's strengths and identifying areas for further improvement.

2.7CLSep 19, 2025
Fine-Tuning Large Multimodal Models for Automatic Pronunciation Assessment

Ke Wang, Wenning Wei, Yan Deng et al.

Automatic Pronunciation Assessment (APA) is critical for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), requiring evaluation across multiple granularities and aspects. Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) present new opportunities for APA, but their effectiveness in fine-grained assessment remains uncertain. This work investigates fine-tuning LMMs for APA using the Speechocean762 dataset and a private corpus. Fine-tuning significantly outperforms zero-shot settings and achieves competitive results on single-granularity tasks compared to public and commercial systems. The model performs well at word and sentence levels, while phoneme-level assessment remains challenging. We also observe that the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC) reaches 0.9, whereas Spearman's rank Correlation Coefficient (SCC) remains around 0.6, suggesting that SCC better reflects ordinal consistency. These findings highlight both the promise and limitations of LMMs for APA and point to future work on fine-grained modeling and rank-aware evaluation.