4.0SDFeb 18
Scaling Open Discrete Audio Foundation Models with Interleaved Semantic, Acoustic, and Text TokensPotsawee Manakul, Woody Haosheng Gan, Martijn Bartelds et al. · gatech
Current audio language models are predominantly text-first, either extending pre-trained text LLM backbones or relying on semantic-only audio tokens, limiting general audio modeling. This paper presents a systematic empirical study of native audio foundation models that apply next-token prediction to audio at scale, jointly modeling semantic content, acoustic details, and text to support both general audio generation and cross-modal capabilities. We provide comprehensive empirical insights for building such models: (1) We systematically investigate design choices -- data sources, text mixture ratios, and token composition -- establishing a validated training recipe. (2) We conduct the first scaling law study for discrete audio models via IsoFLOP analysis on 64 models spanning $3{\times}10^{18}$ to $3{\times}10^{20}$ FLOPs, finding that optimal data grows 1.6$\times$ faster than optimal model size. (3) We apply these lessons to train SODA (Scaling Open Discrete Audio), a suite of models from 135M to 4B parameters on 500B tokens, comparing against our scaling predictions and existing models. SODA serves as a flexible backbone for diverse audio/text tasks -- we demonstrate this by fine-tuning for voice-preserving speech-to-speech translation, using the same unified architecture.
1.6CLFeb 18
Who can we trust? LLM-as-a-jury for Comparative AssessmentMengjie Qian, Guangzhi Sun, Mark J. F. Gales et al.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied as automatic evaluators for natural language generation assessment often using pairwise comparative judgements. Existing approaches typically rely on single judges or aggregate multiple judges assuming equal reliability. In practice, LLM judges vary substantially in performance across tasks and aspects, and their judgment probabilities may be biased and inconsistent. Furthermore, human-labelled supervision for judge calibration may be unavailable. We first empirically demonstrate that inconsistencies in LLM comparison probabilities exist and show that it limits the effectiveness of direct probability-based ranking. To address this, we study the LLM-as-a-jury setting and propose BT-sigma, a judge-aware extension of the Bradley-Terry model that introduces a discriminator parameter for each judge to jointly infer item rankings and judge reliability from pairwise comparisons alone. Experiments on benchmark NLG evaluation datasets show that BT-sigma consistently outperforms averaging-based aggregation methods, and that the learned discriminator strongly correlates with independent measures of the cycle consistency of LLM judgments. Further analysis reveals that BT-sigma can be interpreted as an unsupervised calibration mechanism that improves aggregation by modelling judge reliability.