Scalability of Rapid Prosody Transcription vs. Traditional MOS in Low-Resource TTS Evaluation

Abstract

Abstract: Text-to-Speech synthesis systems are generally evaluated using Mean Opinion Score (MOS) tests, where listeners score samples of synthetic speech on a Likert scale. A major drawback of MOS tests is that they only offer a general measure of overall quality-i.e., the naturalness of an utterance-and so cannot tell us where exactly synthesis errors occur. This can make evaluation of the appropriateness of prosodic variation within utterances inconclusive. To address this, we propose a novel evaluation method based on the Rapid Prosody Transcription paradigm. This allows listeners to mark the locati

Research Question

How does the scalability of Rapid Prosody Transcription-based evaluation compare to traditional MOS tests in terms of annotation time and inter-annotator agreement for low-resource language TTS outputs?

Verification Level

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Truth-Engine Gate Verdict

This record has not completed Gate 2 of the verification pipeline (a type-checked Lean4 proof for mathematical claims, or a sealed-sandbox reproduction for empirical claims). It is a literature synthesis only. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.

Quality Tier

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance