Abstract
Speaker-recognition benchmarks test how accurately a model recovers the speaker label of a recording, treating voice identity as a property of the person who produced it. However, these benchmarks do not evaluate how humans perceive voice identity. Whether a listener hears two voices as the same person has consequences for intellectual property rights, cybersecurity, and everyday life. We introduce the Voice Identity Perception benchmark (VIPBench), which contains 124,876 same-or-different judgments from 1,290 listeners on 9,800 recording pairs from 100 public figures. The pairs include real recordings, voice clones generated by a text-to-speech system, and morphs between two speakers' voices. We also define four tasks that evaluate the alignment between speaker-representation models and human identity perception. The first two tasks measure how well a model's similarity score predicts the proportion of listeners who respond "same" and the majority response. The other two measure whether a model and listeners find the same speaker pairs similar, and whether a model's relationship to listener judgments holds equally for real and synthetic recordings. We evaluate eleven publicly available speech models. Listener judgments diverge from speaker labels most often for voice clones: in 41% of responses, listeners judged a clone and a real recording of the same speaker to be different people. No model reaches the noise ceiling; the best model explains 61% of the explainable variance. Models trained with speaker labels align with listeners better than self-supervised models do, yet a model with a 12% error rate on speaker labels aligns with listeners as well as models with error rates below 2%. VIPBench enables the evaluation of speaker models against human perception on real, cloned, and morphed speech, and our results motivate training speaker models directly on listener judgments.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.05638
