Cited by 150Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsMusic and Audio ProcessingSpeech Recognition and Synthesis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

WavCaps: A ChatGPT-Assisted Weakly-Labelled Audio Captioning Dataset for Audio-Language Multimodal Research

Open access
Mei, Xinhao, Meng, Chutong, Liu, Haohe, Kong, Qiuqiang, Ko, Tom, Zhao, Chengqi, Plumbley, Mark D., Zou, Yuexian, Wang, Wenwu·2024·IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing

Abstract

The advancement of audio-language (AL) multimodal learning tasks has been significant in recent years, yet the limited size of existing audio-language datasets poses challenges for researchers due to the costly and time-consuming collection process. To address this data scarcity issue, we introduceWavCaps, the first large-scale weakly-labelled audio captioning dataset, comprising approximately 400 k audio clips with paired captions. We sourced audio clips and their raw descriptions from web sources and a sound event detection dataset. However, the online-harvested raw descriptions are highly noisy and unsuitable for direct use in tasks such as automated audio captioning. To overcome this issue, we propose a three-stage processing pipeline for filtering noisy data and generating high-quality captions, where ChatGPT, a large language model, is leveraged to filter and transform raw descriptions automatically. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of the characteristics of WavCaps dataset and evaluate it on multiple downstream audio-language multimodal learning tasks. The systems trained on WavCaps outperform previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) models by a significant margin. Our aspiration is for the WavCaps dataset we have proposed to facilitate research in audio-language multimodal learning and demonstrate the potential of utilizing large language models (LLMs) to enhance academic research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/taslp.2024.3419446

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Overview of the three-stage data processing pipeline.
Fig. 1 Overview of the three-stage data processing pipeline.CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Fig. 3 Distribution of audio duration from each data source in the WavCaps dataset. The audio clips from AudioSet are excluded since they are all 10 seconds long.
Fig. 3 Distribution of audio duration from each data source in the WavCaps dataset. The audio clips from AudioSet are excluded since they are all 10 seconds long.CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Fig. 4 Visualization of human validation results. (a) The distribution of Mean Opinion Score (MOS) ratings for ChatGPTaugmented captions with 1 indicating no correspondence and 5 indicating an exact match to the audio content. (b) The evaluators' categorization of the similarity between ChatGPT-augmented captions and human-annotated captions: (A) nearly identical, (B) partial coverage with omissions, and (C) significantly different. (c) The mean accuracy scores of the captions corresponding to each of the three comparative categories between ChatGPT-augmented captions and human-annotated captions.
Fig. 4 Visualization of human validation results. (a) The distribution of Mean Opinion Score (MOS) ratings for ChatGPTaugmented captions with 1 indicating no correspondence and 5 indicating an exact match to the audio content. (b) The evaluators' categorization of the similarity between ChatGPT-augmented captions and human-annotated captions: (A) nearly identical, (B) partial coverage with omissions, and (C) significantly different. (c) The mean accuracy scores of the captions corresponding to each of the three comparative categories between ChatGPT-augmented captions and human-annotated captions.CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 92 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Kim, 2019, AudioCaps: Generating captions for audios in the wild, 119
  2. Martin, 2021, Diversity and bias in audio captioning datasets, 90
  3. 10.5555/3524938.3525087 · DOI
  4. Han, 2021, Automated audio captioning with weakly supervised pre-training and word selection methods, 6

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mei, X., Meng, C., Liu, H., Kong, Q., Ko, T., Zhao, C., Plumbley, M. D., Zou, Y., & Wang, W.
Affiliations
  • University of Surrey (GB)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • ByteDance (China) (CN)
  • Peking University (CN)
Venue
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing
Published
2024
Volume
32
Pages
3339-3354
ISSN
  • 2329-9290 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-9304
OpenAlex
W4400033239
Cited by
150
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 47
FWCI
20.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/T019751/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
Keywords
audio captioning, ChatGPT, large language models, data filtering, sound event detection, data scarcity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review