We introduce Speech-based Intelligence Quotient (SIQ) as a new form of human cognition-inspired evaluation pipeline for voice understanding large language models (LLM_Voice), designed to assess their voice understanding ability. Moving beyond popular voice understanding metrics such as word error rate (WER), SIQ examines LLM_Voice across three cognitive levels motivated by Bloom’s Taxonomy: (1) Remembering (i.e., WER for verbatim accuracy); (2) Understanding (i.e., similarity of LLM’s interpretations); and (3) Application (i.e., QA accuracy for simulating downstream tasks). We demonstrate that SIQ not only quantifies voice understanding abilities but also provides unified comparisons between cascaded methods (e.g., ASR-LLM) and end-to-end models, identifies annotation errors in existing benchmarks, and detects hallucinations in LLM_Voice. Our framework represents a first-of-its-kind intelligence examination that bridges cognitive principles with voice-oriented benchmarks, while exposing overlooked challenges in multi-modal training. Our code and data will be open source to encourage future studies.

Construction of a general-purpose post-recognition error corrector poses a crucial question: how can we most effectively train a model on a large mixture of domain datasets? The answer would lie in learning dataset-specific features and digesting their knowledge in a single model. Previous methods achieve this by having separate correction language models, resulting in a significant increase in parameters. In this work, we present Mixture-of-Experts as a solution, highlighting that MoEs are much more than a scalability tool. We propose a Multi-Task Correction MoE, where we train the experts to become an “expert” of speech-to-text, language-to-text and vision-to-text datasets by learning to route each dataset’s tokens to its mapped expert. Experiments on the Open ASR Leaderboard show that we explore a new state-of-the-art performance by achieving an average relative 5.0% WER reduction and substantial improvements in BLEU scores for speech and translation tasks. On zero-shot evaluation, NeKo outperforms GPT-3.5 and Claude-3.5-Sonnet with 15.5% to 27.6% relative WER reduction in the Hyporadise benchmark. NeKo performs competitively on grammar and post-OCR correction as a multi-task model.

Recent studies have augmented large language models (LLMs) with speech capabilities, leading to the development of speech language models (SpeechLMs). Earlier SpeechLMs focused on single-turn speech-based question answering (QA), where user input comprised a speech context and a text question. More recent studies have extended this to multi-turn conversations, though they often require complex, multi-stage supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with diverse data. Another critical challenge with SpeechLMs is catastrophic forgetting, where models optimized for speech tasks suffer significant degradation in text-only performance. To mitigate these issues, we propose a novel single-stage joint speech-text SFT approach on the low-rank adaptation (LoRA) of the LLM backbone. Our joint SFT combines text-only SFT data with three types of speech-related data: speech recognition and translation, speech-based QA, and mixed-modal SFT. Compared to previous SpeechLMs with 7B or 13B parameters, our 3B model demonstrates superior performance across various speech benchmarks while preserving the original capabilities on text-only tasks. Furthermore, our model shows emergent abilities of effectively handling previously unseen prompts and tasks, including multi-turn, mixed-modal inputs.

We reassess a recent study (Hassan et al., 2018) that claimed that machine translation (MT) has reached human parity for the translation of news from Chinese into English, using pairwise ranking and considering three variables that were not taken into account in that previous study: the language in which the source side of the test set was originally written, the translation proficiency of the evaluators, and the provision of inter-sentential context. If we consider only original source text (i.e. not translated from another language, or translationese), then we find evidence showing that human parity has not been achieved. We compare the judgments of professional translators against those of non-experts and discover that those of the experts result in higher inter-annotator agreement and better discrimination between human and machine translations. In addition, we analyse the human translations of the test set and identify important translation issues. Finally, based on these findings, we provide a set of recommendations for future human evaluations of MT.