Evaluates native full-duplex audio-language models on speech understanding, speech generation, and real-time conversational capabilities. It measures how well models handle asynchronous text-audio streams, responsiveness to interruptions, and overall dialogue quality compared to specialized ASR/TTS systems and other full-duplex chatbots. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Fleurs-zh, LibriSpeech-clean, LlamaQuestions, Seed-TTS-en, Seed-TTS-zh, Custom Chinese Speech Instruction-Following S...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill flm-audio-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Flm Audio Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-flm-audio-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: flm-audio-eval
description: Evaluates native full-duplex audio-language models on speech understanding, speech generation, and real-time conversational capabilities. It measures how well models handle asynchronous text-audio streams, responsiveness to interruptions, and overall dialogue quality compared to specialized ASR/TTS systems and other full-duplex chatbots. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Fleurs-zh, LibriSpeech-clean, LlamaQuestions, Seed-TTS-en, Seed-TTS-zh, Custom Chinese Speech Instruction-Following Set, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports WER.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2509.02521
bibtex_key: yao2025flmaudio
confidence: high
---
# flm-audio-eval
> FLM-Audio: Natural Monologues Improves Native Full-Duplex Chatbots via Dual Training — Yao et al. (2025) (arXiv:2509.02521, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates native full-duplex audio-language models on speech understanding, speech generation, and real-time conversational capabilities. It measures how well models handle asynchronous text-audio streams, responsiveness to interruptions, and overall dialogue quality compared to specialized ASR/TTS systems and other full-duplex chatbots.
## Datasets
- **Fleurs-zh** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **LibriSpeech-clean** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **LlamaQuestions** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Seed-TTS-en** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Seed-TTS-zh** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Custom Chinese Speech Instruction-Following Set** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `WER` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Word Error Rate: ratio of edit operations (insertions, deletions, substitutions) to the number of words in the reference transcript.
- `Accuracy` — range: [0, 1]
- Exact-match accuracy for spoken question answering on LlamaQuestions.
- `SIM` — range: [0, 1]
- Speaker Similarity score computed using a lightly fine-tuned speaker verification model on generated audio.
- `LLM-score` — range: [0, 10]
- Quality score (0-10) assigned by DeepSeek-V3 comparing candidate textual responses to ground-truth answers.
- `Human Evaluation Ratings` — range: [0, 10]
- Average ratings from 5 annotators across four dimensions: Helpfulness, Naturalness, Responsiveness, and Robustness.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Audio prompts (converted from text for instruction-following), spoken questions, and reference audio clips for voice cloning/generation tasks.
**Output**: Text responses for ASR/QA/instruction-following tasks; generated audio waveforms for TTS evaluation.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, references, generated_audio, reference_audio, candidate_text, ground_truth):
wer = sum(edit_distance(p, r) / len(r) for p, r in zip(predictions, references)) / len(references)
acc = sum(1 for p, r in zip(predictions, references) if p == r) / len(references)
sim = speaker_similarity_model.score(generated_audio, reference_audio)
llm_score = deepseek_v3.score(candidate_text, ground_truth)
human_scores = [annotator.rates[dim] for annotator in annotators for dim in dimensions]
return {'WER': wer, 'Accuracy': acc, 'SIM': sim, 'LLM-score': llm_score, 'Human': mean(human_scores)}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Table 4 explicitly notes that different results for the same model come from different evaluation sources, potentially indicating different inference configurations.
- TTS similarity scores marked with (*) use a lightly fine-tuned similarity model, not the standard open-source speaker verification metric.
- The custom instruction-following benchmark converts text prompts to audio via a TTS pipeline before evaluation, so TTS quality indirectly affects instruction-following scores.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For ASR, we adopt word error rate (WER) as the primary metric, testing on both Chinese and English benchmarks, including Fleurs-zh *[fleurs]* and LibriSpeech-clean *[librispeech]*. While instruction-following with spoken input is addressed separately in Section[4.3], we also include LlamaQuestions *[llamaquestions]* as a speech-based QA benchmark, reporting accuracy.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{yao2025flmaudio,
title={FLM-Audio: Natural Monologues Improves Native Full-Duplex Chatbots via Dual Training},
author={Yao et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2509.02521}
}
```
- arXiv: 2509.02521
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!