Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.23759

The ISCSLP 2026 Real-World Audio-Visual Speech Enhancement Challenge

Kai Li·Wenze Ren·Junjie Li·Cheng Yu·Peijun Yang·Chien-yu Huang·Haibin Wu·Szu-Wei Fu·Wen-Chin Huang·Hsin-Min Wang·Xiaolin Hu·Ming Li·DeLiang Wang·Yu Tsao
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Audio-visual speech enhancement (AVSE) uses visual-speech cues from a target speaker to recover that speaker's speech from noisy or overlapping speech. Many widely used protocols construct mixed signals from separately recorded audio sources and assume reliable video, leaving their performance under natural overlap and visual failure insufficiently characterized. The Real-World AVSE Challenge evaluates two related settings. Track~1 comprises two scenarios: real-world mixtures recorded with two speakers speaking simultaneously, without a corresponding clean reference signal, and synthetic remixes obtained by manually mixing the separately recorded speech of two speakers, with a clean reference signal available; Track~2 reuses audio but pairs it with a degraded target video and contains additional 3-m far-field recordings. The speakers in the development and test sets are disjoint. Evaluation metrics include clean-waveform fidelity, learned quality estimates, transcription accuracy, and speaker identification. In the remix task on the development set, the baseline model achieved an SI-SDR of $-4.069$~dB and an STOI of $0.388$ on Track~1, and an SI-SDR of $-2.851$~dB and an STOI of $0.470$ on Track~2. We release the AV-ConvTasNet checkpoints, the offline evaluator, and the official baseline results on the development and test sets.

Explore related subjects

eess.AScs.SD

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kai Li, Wenze Ren, Junjie Li, Cheng Yu, Peijun Yang, Chien-yu Huang, Haibin Wu, Szu-Wei Fu, Wen-Chin Huang, Hsin-Min Wang, Xiaolin Hu, Ming Li, DeLiang Wang, Yu Tsao. 2026-09-08. The ISCSLP 2026 Real-World Audio-Visual Speech Enhancement Challenge. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23759

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.SD subjecteess.AS subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

LLMs and Speech: Integration vs. Combination

In this work, we study different approaches to utilize large language models (LLMs) for automatic speech recognition (ASR). Specifically, we compare the tight integration of an acoustic model (AM) with the LLM ("speech LLM") to the traditional way of combining AM and LLM via shallow fusion and provide ablations on the effect of different label units and LLM sizes. For tight integration, we further examine the effect of attention interfaces, encoder downsampling, and length normalization. Furthermore, we investigate joint recognition with a CTC model to mitigate hallucinations of speech LLMs and present effective optimizations. We train and evaluate on LibriSpeech and Loquacious and additionally evaluate on the HuggingFace ASR leaderboard. Across model sizes, we find that shallow fusion consistently outperforms tight integration of AM and LLM on in-domain data, highlighting the importance of strong shallow-fusion baselines when evaluating speech LLMs for ASR. On the more heterogeneous HuggingFace ASR leaderboard, however, the integrated prefix LLM achieves lower average WER than shallow fusion, with gains concentrated on out-of-domain corpora.

eess.AS↗
arXiv2026

Vaani Benchmark V1.0: An Inclusive Multimodal Benchmark Dataset for Hindi

Benchmarking is critical for the systematic evaluation of machine learning systems. While several open-source datasets are available for Hindi, existing benchmarks remain limited in terms of modality, geographic diversity, demographic representation, and transcription robustness. We introduce an inclusive, multimodal Hindi benchmark dataset collected from 102 districts across India. The dataset consists of spontaneous speech elicited using image prompts and recorded under real-world acoustic conditions across diverse demographic groups. Each audio segment is associated with the image prompt that elicited it and is annotated with three independent transcriptions, enabling multi-reference evaluation that accounts for permissible orthographic and lexical variations. We show that single-reference evaluation overstates errors, while multi-reference evaluation provides a more robust, inclusive, and realistic assessment of automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems. The pairing of each utterance with its eliciting image further enables image retrieval evaluation using both speech and text queries. We evaluate multiple multimodal embedding models for image retrieval and report their performance on the combined speech--image and text--image retrieval tasks. The results reveal a performance gap between text-based and audio-based retrieval, with text-based retrieval consistently achieving higher performance.

eess.AS↗
arXiv2026

Cover First, Disagree Softly: Rethinking Mismatch-First Active Learning for Frame-Level Audio Classification

Sound event detection relies on frame-level strong labels whose annotation is expensive. Active learning addresses this problem by selecting the audio segments whose labels help the classifier most. One of the prevailing acquisition strategies for this task, mismatch-first farthest-traversal (MFFT), combines the disagreement between two classifiers and the diversity of the selected segments through hard sequential decisions. It selects whole groups of high-disagreement segments first and spreads only the remaining budget by farthest traversal. On two multi-label datasets we show that this design is blind to the similarity among the selected segments and fails under low budgets, with every mismatch-first variant ending below the plain geometric strategy it builds on. We propose mismatch-weighted facility location (MW-FL), which spends the entire budget through a disagreement-weighted coverage objective that penalizes similarity among the selected segments. The disagreement signal from MFFT is used to obtain the nonnegative weights of this facility-location objective, using fixed smoothing without dataset-specific tuning. Experiments across two geometric mechanisms with three ways of using disagreement show that coverage of the selected segments is the dominant factor, hard disagreement gating of selection is harmful on both mechanisms, and soft disagreement weighting helps on top of coverage. MW-FL attains the best area under the learning curve on both datasets.

eess.AS↗