Do What I Say: A Spoken Prompt Dataset for Instruction-Following
Authors: Maike Züfle, Sara Papi, Fabian Retkowski, Szymon Mazurek, Marek Kasztelnik, Alexander Waibel, Luisa Bentivogli, Jan Niehues
Organizations: Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany · Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Italy · ACC Cyfronet AGH, Poland · AGH University of Krakow, Poland · Carnegie Mellon University, U.S.
Speech Large Language Models (SLLMs) have rapidly expanded, supporting a wide range of tasks. These models are typically evaluated using text prompts, which may not reflect real-world scenarios where users interact with speech. To address this gap, we introduce DoWhatISay (DOWIS), a multilingual dataset of human-recorded spoken and written prompts designed to pair with any existing benchmark for realistic evaluation of SLLMs under spoken instruction conditions. Spanning 9 tasks and 11 languages, it provides 10 prompt variants per task-language pair, across five styles. Using DOWIS, we benchmark state-of-the-art SLLMs, analyzing the interplay between prompt modality, style, language, and task type. Results show that text prompts consistently outperform spoken prompts, particularly for low-resource and cross-lingual settings. Only for tasks with speech output, spoken prompts do close the gap, highlighting the need for speech-based prompting in SLLM evaluation.
Figures & tables
Recording
de
en
it
cs
es
fr
hu
nl
pt
ru
sv
# Male Spks.
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
# Female Spks.
2
2
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
Spk. Avg. (min)
8
8
9
8
9
9
11
10
8
9
8
Total (min)
33
31
35
17
17
18
11
10
8
9
8
9 tasks, 11 langs; Total Audio: 3h17m
Table 1: Annotators per language for DOWIS prompts.
Monolingual Tasks
ASR
SQA
ACHAP
TTS
4.3s
5.0s
15.8s
4.4s
Monolingual (*) and Crosslingual (†) Tasks
MT †
ST †
TSUM * †
SSUM * †
S2ST †
4.1s
4.5s
4.6s
4.6s
4.8s
Table 2: Average duration per prompt across languages.
Figure 1: Performance comparison for Qwen: Text Prompt vs Speech Prompts with respect to different target languages. Positive values (purple) indicate text prompt performs better, negative values indicate speech prompts perform better.
Task
Metric
Model
Text
Speech
Speech Prompt
Prompt
Prompt
Male
Fem.
ASR
WER ↓
Phi*
16.69
332.41
402.77
271.15
Qwen
12.60
17.08
13.77
14.91
SQA
BERTS. ↑
Phi
36.49
11.16
11.37
10.96
Qwen
27.85
27.12
27.13
27.11
ACHAP
CollarF1 ↑
Phi
7.49
6.27
6.56
5.99
Table 3: The impact of speech vs. text prompts. The results are averaged over different prompt types and languages. *Phi only supports the languages ’en’, ’de’, ’fr’, ’it’, ’es’, ’pt’ for speech input, so we limit the evaluation to these for ASR. For the last two columns, only languages are considered, where DOWIS provides male and female speakers (details in Table 1 ).
Figure 2: Performance comparison for Qwen2.5-Omni: Text Prompt vs Speech Prompts with respect to different prompt types. Positive values (purple) indicate text prompt performs better, negative values (yellow) indicate speech prompts perform better.
Task
Model
Prompt Type
Task
Model
Prompt Type
Basic
Formal
Inform.
Detail.
Short
Basic
Formal
Inform.
Detail.
Short
ASR ↓
Phi*
187.49
199.13
274.56
173.05
251.39
MT ↑
Phi
60.35
55.14
59.62
62.44
56.86
Qwen
19.79
10.51
16.32
13.39
21.58
Qwen
76.55
74.75
73.98
75.56
72.08
SQA ↑
Phi
20.48
21.17
17.58
21.04
17.77
ST ↑
Phi
65.65
65.33
62.71
61.19
64.72
Qwen
28.55
27.92
27.26
26.60
26.49
Qwen
73.90
74.67
73.49
69.51
72.00
ACHAP
Phi a
7.66
8.48
6.95
8.11
2.18
TSUM ↑
Phi
40.11
44.67
43.73
45.15
39.06
Table 4: The impact of prompt typs. Results are averaged over prompt modalities and languages. Metrics are the same as in Table 3 . For tasks with multiple metrics, the metrics are: a CollarF1 ↑ , b BERTS. GC↑ ; c UTMOS ↑ , d WER ASR↓ ; e UTMOS ↑ , f COM. ASR↑ . *Phi only supports the languages ’en’, ’de’, ’fr’, ’it’, ’es’, ’pt’ for speech input, so we limit the evaluation to these for ASR.
Voice assistants increasingly rely on Speech Language Models (SpeechLMs) to interpret spoken queries and execute complex tasks, yet existing benchmarks lack domain breadth, acoustic diversity, and compositional reasoning complexity to evaluate tool-calling performance. We introduce Audio2Tool, a large-scale dataset comprising approximately 30,000 queries designed to assess tool-calling capabilities of SpeechLMs across three primary domains: Smart Car, Smart Home, and Wearables. Our benchmark features a multi-tier complexity hierarchy, ranging from simple direct commands to complex multi-intent and needle-in-a-haystack extraction to isolate distinct failure modes. To ensure realism, we employ zero-shot voice cloning text-to-speech synthesis and diverse noise profiles to simulate in-the-wild conditions. Evaluations of state-of-the-art SpeechLMs and ASR-LLM pipelines show strong performance on simple commands but significant degradation under compositional and acoustic challenges. Code and dataset are publicly available on the project page: https://audio2tool.github.io/.
Spoken Language Models (SLMs) generate textual responses directly from speech, offering an alternative to cascaded systems. Despite recent advances, existing SLMs still exhibit weaker instruction-following behavior and limited generalization across diverse tasks compared to text-based language models. Our analysis shows that speech and text representations in current SLMs remain weakly aligned despite strong downstream performance, indicating that structural differences between continuous, temporally varying speech and discrete text remain insufficiently addressed. To address this, we propose a simple framework that decouples length mismatch from semantic alignment and encourages closer correspondence between speech and text representations. Experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate competitive performance against strong baselines, underscoring the importance of explicitly addressing structural differences between speech and text in SLM training. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/jaykim9870/Do_SLMs_Hear_Speech_as_They_Read_Text.
Speech Large Language Models (LLMs) that understand and follow instructions in many languages are useful for real-world interaction, but are difficult to train with supervised fine-tuning, requiring large, task-specific speech corpora. While recent distillation-based approaches train performant English-only Speech LLMs using only annotated ASR data by aligning text and speech using only a lightweight projector, these models under-perform when scaled to multilingual settings due to language interference in the shared projector. We address this by introducing language-aware distillation using a query bank and a gating network that selects or mixes query tokens using a Q-Former projector. Our approach shows gains of 14% over matched multilingual distillation baselines on instruction following. We further synthesize Audio-MLQA, a multilingual spoken QA benchmark built on MLQA with high-quality TTS questions. Our best model improves over existing Speech LLM baselines by 32% on Audio-MLQA.
Shreyas Gopal, Donghang Wu, Ashutosh Anshul +5
College of Computing and Data Science, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore · AI Singapore, National University of Singapore · Institute for Infocomm Research (I2R), A∗STAR, Singapore