Nonverbal vocalizations (NVs), such as laughter and sighs, are central to the expression of affective cues in emotional speech synthesis. However, learning diverse and contextually aligned NVs remains challenging in open settings due to limited NV data and the lack of explicit supervision. Motivated by this challenge, we propose Affectron as a framework for affective and contextually aligned NV generation. Built on a small-scale open and decoupled corpus, Affectron introduces an NV-augmented training strategy that expands the distribution of NV types and insertion locations. We further incorporate NV structural masking into a speech backbone pre-trained on purely verbal speech to enable diverse and natural NV synthesis. Experimental results demonstrate that Affectron produces more expressive and diverse NVs than baseline systems while preserving the naturalness of the verbal speech stream.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Analysis of emotional attribute change patterns across temporal gaps (up to a gap of 10) for the EARS Richter et al. (2024) dataset (verbal only) and the NonverbalTTS Borisov et al. (2025) dataset (verbal-nonverbal combined speech).
Figure 2: Overview of the Affectron training framework. NV candidates are selected and routed to contextually appropriate locations to construct NV-augmented training samples, which are then used to fine-tune the VoiceCraft backbone for affect-aware NV synthesis.
Figure 3: AB preference test comparing the proposed NV augmentation with rule-guided randomized strategies following CapSpeech Wang et al. (2025a) .
Method
DA
EDNM
EAR
NSM
Nonverbal Metrics
Verbal Metrics
NV-Acc ( ↑ )
NV-Sim ( ↑ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
WER ( ↓ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
Seen Speakers
Augmented GT
-
-
-
-
85.96
-
0.5796
0.9231
1.13
0.6186
0.9163
VoiceCraft Peng et al. (2024)
✗
✗
✗
✗
10.49
0.5898
0.6149
0.8950
9.05
0.6212
0.8927
Affectron (Proposed)
✓
✗
✗
✗
58.78
0.5988
0.5455
0.8927
6.06
0.6190
0.8950
✓
✓
✗
✗
35.83
0.6085
0.5648
0.8897
6.02
0.6126
0.8892
Table 1: Experimental results of the proposed method for both seen and unseen speakers. DA, EDNM, EAR, and NSM denote data augmentation, emotion-driven top- K NV matching, emotion-aware top- K routing, and NV structural masking, respectively. Augmented GT applies our NV augmentation to the ground truth.
Figure 4: Comparison of our proposed method in terms of NTN-MOS and NEC-MOS. Augmented GT applies our NV augmentation to the ground truth. Vertical lines illustrate the 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 5: Comparison of the diversity of generated fine-grained filler variations across models.
Method
Acc@1 ( ↑ )
Acc@3 ( ↑ )
Acc@5 ( ↑ )
JSD ( ↓ )
HD ( ↓ )
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Qwen 2.5-7B Hui et al. (2024)
7.48
25.65
14.13
47.03
25.30
69.39
0.1425
0.2139
0.3970
0.5027
LLaMA 3.1-8B Grattafiori et al. (2024)
5.46
16.03
18.76
49.88
21.85
77.32
0.4399
0.3020
0.3884
0.5741
GPT-oss-20B Agarwal et al. (2025)
26.84
16.98
50.24
51.19
62.47
72.68
0.1278
0.1130
0.4328
0.3523
Vicuna-7B Chiang et al. (2023)
13.78
11.28
23.63
41.57
39.07
69.48
0.1535
0.2431
0.3847
0.5176
Affectron-330M (Proposed)
12.59
75.77
29.69
85.99
44.06
91.69
0.0523
0.0051
0.2414
0.0723
Table 2: Comparison of zero-shot NV type and location prediction across LLMs and the Affectron model. Prediction accuracy is measured using top- K accuracy (Acc@1/3/5) and distributional alignment is assessed using Jensen-Shannon Divergence (JSD) and Hellinger Distance (HD).
Figure 6: Comparison of emotional attribute change patterns across temporal gaps using angular distance, Cartesian distance, and spherical radial differences.
Method
Acc@1 ( ↑ )
Acc@3 ( ↑ )
Acc@5 ( ↑ )
JSD ( ↓ )
HD ( ↓ )
Cartesian Distance
11.05
28.86
41.69
0.0568
0.2517
Radial Difference
11.88
28.98
41.45
0.0544
0.2495
Angular Distance
12.59
29.69
44.06
0.0523
0.2414
Table 3: Comparison of zero-shot NV type and location prediction across distance metrics. Prediction accuracy is measured using top- K accuracy (Acc@1/3/5) and distributional alignment is assessed using Jensen-Shannon Divergence (JSD) and Hellinger Distance (HD).
Appendix figures & tables13 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
Acc@1 ( ↑ )
Acc@3 ( ↑ )
Acc@5 ( ↑ )
JSD ( ↓ )
HD ( ↓ )
Wav2Vec2-Base
75.15
85.04
86.94
0.0074
0.0881
HuBERT-Base
74.60
85.15
88.72
0.0104
0.1041
WavLM-Base
75.10
85.27
87.29
0.0071
0.0869
CLAP
40.93
58.84
73.43
0.1288
0.3870
Emotion2Vec
75.77
85.99
91.69
0.0051
0.0723
Appendix
Table 4: Comparison of alternative embedding choices for NV type prediction within the top- K NV matching framework.
NV Category
Angry
Disgusted
Fearful
Happy
Neutral
Sad
Surprised
Agreement
236
30
3
297
45
20
148
Anger
571
98
4
115
44
36
80
Congratulations
339
150
8
429
61
50
470
Filler
72
89
–
91
185
56
144
Greetings
151
30
2
254
27
15
313
Cheering
32
16
11
181
7
10
83
Appendix
Table 5: Distribution of Emotion2Vec-based pseudo-label predictions across NV categories in the EARS dataset.
Figure 7: Overview of the emotion-aware top- K routing process. (a) Word-level emotional attributes are extracted from verbal speech using MFA and an emotional attribute predictor. (b) Affective distance computation between an NV candidate and verbal segments via angular distance in spherical coordinates.
Method
Nonverbal Metrics
Verbal Metrics
NV-Acc ( ↑ )
NV-Sim ( ↑ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
WER ( ↓ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
Augmented GT
89.29
-
0.5487
0.9092
2.93
0.6733
0.8995
VoiceCraft-330M ♠ Peng et al. (2024)
-
-
-
-
8.89
0.5410
0.8483
CosyVoice2-0.5B ♠ Du et al. (2024)
25.00
0.4097
0.4991
0.8751
1.97
0.4876
0.8739
Fun-CosyVoice3-0.5B ♠ Du et al. (2025)
27.38
0.4222
0.4792
0.8952
1.65
0.4904
0.8916
Dia-1.6B ♠ Nari-labs (2025)
13.10
0.4894
0.4549
0.8484
11.5
0.5204
0.8690
Appendix
Table 6: Comparison of NV-capable zero-shot TTS models on unseen speakers in the EARS dataset Richter et al. (2024) zero-shot evaluation setting. ♠ denotes a pre-trained model using the official implementation without any training or fine-tuning on the EARS dataset. ♣ denotes a model fine-tuned on the EARS dataset based on the official pre-trained checkpoint.
Method
Nonverbal Metrics
Verbal Metrics
NV-Acc ( ↑ )
NV-Sim ( ↑ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
WER ( ↓ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
Augmented GT
89.29
-
0.5487
0.9092
2.93
0.6733
0.8995
Cross-speaker NV mixing
14.29
0.4939
0.4731
0.8571
9.40
0.5520
0.8604
Same-speaker NV mixing
16.67
0.4819
0.4979
0.8675
8.89
0.5518
0.8660
Appendix
Table 7: Ablation study on cross-speaker and same-speaker NV mixing in unseen-speaker zero-shot TTS synthesis.
Method
KEDNM
KEAR
Nonverbal Metrics
Verbal Metrics
NV-Acc ( ↑ )
NV-Sim ( ↑ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
WER ( ↓ )
EECS ( ↑ )
SECS ( ↑ )
Seen Speakers
Augmented GT
-
-
85.96
-
0.5796
0.9231
1.13
0.6186
0.9163
Affectron (Proposed)
1
1
27.92
0.5965
0.5684
0.8887
8.35
0.6148
0.8885
3
3
32.18
0.5961
0.5673
0.8891
6.59
0.6216
0.8886
5
5
36.16
0.5970
0.5656
0.8905
6.19
0.6155
0.8878
Appendix
Table 8: Grid search over the top- K hyperparameters for emotion-driven NV matching (EDNM) and emotion-aware routing (EAR). Augmented GT applies our NV augmentation to the ground truth.
Figure 8: Word-cloud visualization of generated fine-grained filler variations for VoiceCraft Peng et al. (2024) and Affectron. The size of each keyword corresponds to its relative frequency among the realized filler variants.
Figure 9: Sample prompt templates for NV type and location prediction.
Method
Acc@1 ( ↑ )
Acc@3 ( ↑ )
Acc@5 ( ↑ )
JSD ( ↓ )
HD ( ↓ )
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Location
Type
Qwen2-Audio-7B (Text only) Chu et al. (2024)
6.68
12.00
16.39
53.56
18.68
76.96
0.2862
0.4346
0.5704
0.7150
Qwen2-Audio-7B (Text and Speech) Chu et al. (2024)
7.36
12.83
18.05
57.60
18.41
80.17
0.2353
0.4338
0.5188
0.7023
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B (Text only) Xu et al. (2025)
6.53
12.47
12.11
43.94
27.32
69.90
0.2213
0.3334
0.4967
0.6138
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B (Text and Speech) Xu et al. (2025)
7.36
20.07
12.23
56.41
28.86
75.30
0.2155
0.3307
0.4961
0.6096
Affectron-330M (Proposed)
12.59
75.77
29.69
85.99
44.06
91.69
0.0523
0.0051
0.2414
0.0723
Appendix
Table 9: Comparison of zero-shot NV type and location prediction across LLMs and the Affectron model. Prediction accuracy is measured using top- K accuracy (Acc@1/3/5) and distributional alignment is assessed using Jensen-Shannon Divergence (JSD) and Hellinger Distance (HD).
Figure 10: Comparison of Mel-spectrograms generated by different models for the same utterance. Results are shown for a seen speaker and an unseen speaker. NV segments are highlighted in red, and NV - Sim scores are annotated in blue. EDNM, EAR, and NSM denote emotion-driven top- K NV matching, emotion-aware top- K routing, and NV structural masking, respectively. Augmented GT applies our affectively aligned NV augmentation to the ground truth.
Figure 11: Detailed information on listener requirements and the AB preference test interfaces.
Figure 12: Detailed information on listener requirements and NV-context emotional congruence (NEC-MOS) evaluation interfaces.
Figure 13: Detailed information on listener requirements and NV-type naturalness (NTN-MOS) evaluation interfaces.
The user experience of speech interaction models has improved, benefiting from the modeling of paralinguistic attributes and advances in speech reconstruction paradigms. However, human communication follows extensive norms regarding non-verbal vocalizations (NVVs) spanning respiratory, affective, and discourse. The omission of these events imposes inherent limitations on the naturalness of current approaches. In this work, we cover 13 major types of NVVs and construct a natural dialogue dataset that conforms to human conversational norms through an automated synthesis pipeline. We enhance the ability of speech interaction models to generate contextually appropriate NVV events through multi-stage fine-tuning and NVV-aware GRPO (Group Relative Policy Optimization). Based on distinct modeling paradigms, we substantially improve the expressiveness of VocalNet and VITA-Qinyu in empathy interactions and role-play dialogues, and further discuss the architectural necessity for achieving high-quality natural speech generation.
Non-verbal vocalizations (NVs), such as laughter, coughs, and sighs, are essential for expressive TTS, but the effectiveness of preference optimization for NV generation remains poorly understood. We systematically study preference optimization for NV-capable TTS, focusing on preference signals, preference-pair construction, and DPO-based optimization objectives. We formulate an NV-aware character error rate (NV-CER) by treating NV tags as distinct output symbols and computing a weighted pinyin-based CER over both verbal and non-verbal content, enabling controllable optimization of NV realization without modifying the underlying optimization algorithm. Experiments on Emilia-NV and the augmented NV-Bench covering 18 NV types reveal how different design choices affect NV realization and lexical fidelity, and establish an effective setup using standard DPO. Objective, LLM-based, and human evaluations provide converging evidence for our findings, offering practical insights into NV-aware post-training for expressive TTS.
Haoyang Li, Chenglin Xu, Junchuan Zhao +4
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore · LIGHTSPEED, Singapore · National University of Singapore, Singapore +2
Controllable synthesis of nonverbal vocalizations (NVVs) is es- sential for natural and expressive speech, but remains challeng- ing due to their acoustic diversity and imbalanced distribution in existing corpora. To address these challenges, we develop an NVV-aware DiTAR system that models continuous speech latents, encodes the 16 target NVV categories as dedicated to- kens, and adapts stop prediction to distinguish mid-utterance vocalizations from utterance boundaries. Training begins with large-scale bilingual pre-training on diverse NVV speech, fol- lowed by continued supervised fine-tuning on a corpus en- hanced through targeted synthetic augmentation and frequency- aware rebalancing. At inference time, we select the acoustic prompt, tune the LM-guidance and noise-injection scales, and apply Best-of-N sampling with multi-metric selection to re- duce generation failures. The final system achieves an official weighted bilingual score of 62.786, ranking first in Mandarin, second in English, and first overall among participating systems in Track 2 of the ISCSLP 2026 NVVSpeech Challenge. Ab- lation studies show that targeted augmentation benefits under- represented NVV categories the most, while robust candidate selection requires balancing NVV correctness, lexical fidelity, and perceptual quality.