3 ms·
It seems like the abstract is a little bit misleading. WaveNet is almost scoring half a point better on a scale from 1 to 5. Tacotron 2 [1] is scoring even bett
by ma2rten 6y ago
It seems like the abstract is a little bit misleading. WaveNet is almost scoring half a point better on a scale from 1 to 5. Tacotron 2 [1] is scoring even better and reporting a score which is almost human-like:
EATS 4.083
WaveNet 4.41
Tacotron 2 4.53
Human Speech 4.55
It seems like a stretch to me to say it's "a comparable to the state-of-the-art models".
[1] https://google.github.io/tacotron/publications/tacotron2/index.html https://google.github.io/tacotron/publications/tacotron2/ind...
- visarga 6y agoThey say it uses less supervision, so it's better in a different way.
- quantumwoke 6y agoYou can't compare the scales directly across different papers because it's a subjective Mean Opinion Score (MOS) in 0.5 increments, usually taken from a different Mechanical Turk sample. It's a shame that the EATS paper didn't do their own MOS for many of the standard models. However, as pointed out in the paper the real benefits here are in reduced inference/training time and improved attention learning which many of the current models struggle with.
- ma2rten 6y agoEATS and Wavenet are from the same research group. EATS and Tacotron have almost the same score for the human sample. None of the papers said that they used Mechanical Turk. Google has it's own internal MT-like service which is probably more consistent.