This study presents a comparative analysis between the speaker embeddings of speech foundation models and human subjective perception of speaker similarity. Human listeners have the ability to judge speaker similarity on a continuous scale discerning how similar two voices are. In contrast, speech foundation models embed speaker characteristics into numerical representation. However, a question remains: does the numerical distance between speaker embeddings in these models truly align with the similarity perceived by humans? To address this, we conduct a comprehensive investigation using more than 40 models to compare model-derived distances with human-perceived similarity scores. Furthermore, we identify which factors in model configuration contribute most to a speaker embedding that mirrors human perception. Our findings provide insights for the development of more perceptually grounded speech foundation models.
Sound symbolism, the human tendency to map speech sounds to perceptual qualities such as roundness or sharpness, arises primarily from the acoustics of speech rather than spelling. Whether Speech Language Models (SLMs) share this tendency remains open, as prior evaluations rely on text or images rather than real speech. We study it using genuine human speech recordings, comparing model judgments against human data across the auditory, crossmodal, and visual components of the effect. We find that SLMs' auditory judgments align poorly with human perception and miss the acoustic cues, such as spectral tilt, that drive human intuitions, and open-weight models cannot reliably link a heard sound to its corresponding shape. With a visual-only control ruling out shape perception, the weakness localizes to how speech is represented, suggesting that perceptual alignment depends not on stronger vision but on speech representations that capture the cues humans hear.
Speech foundation models, pre-trained on large corpora of unlabelled speech data, produce general-purpose representations which are useful across tasks. However, these representations encode information about salient speech variables in a distributed manner, while downstream speech tasks rely on only some of this variability. In this work, we propose a post-training refinement approach using interventional contrastive learning. By leveraging an interventional dataset and multi-part contrastive loss, we learn a transformation from the entangled representation space of speech foundation models into separate content and speaker subspaces. We evaluate the learnt representations on speaker verification and keyword spotting tasks, showing improved out-of-domain speaker verification performance and evidence that speaker and content information are separated across the learned subspaces.
Objective metrics for emotional expressiveness are vital for speech generation, particularly in expressive synthesis and voice conversion requiring emotional prosody transfer. To quantify this, the field widely relies on emotion similarity between reference and generated samples. This approach computes cosine similarity of embeddings from encoders like emotion2vec, assuming they capture affective cues despite linguistic and speaker variations. We challenge this assumption through controlled adversarial tasks and human alignment tests. Despite high classification accuracy, these latent spaces are unsuitable for zero-shot similarity evaluation. Representational limitations cause linguistic and speaker interference to overshadow emotional features, degrading discriminative ability. Consequently, the metric misaligns with human perception. This acoustic vulnerability reveals it rewards acoustic mimicry over genuine emotional synthesis.