Iterative Self-Learning for Expressive Text-to-Speech Synthesis
Organizations: University of Edinburgh
Abstract
Expressive text-to-speech (TTS) systems that use explicit conditioning labels provide direct and interpretable control over expressive attributes, in contrast to reference-based or prompting-based approaches, but require labeled data. Obtaining these labels at scale is costly and time-consuming, yet no prior semi-supervised framework addresses this specific bottleneck. Existing semi-supervised TTS methods instead target scarcity of paired speech-text data or transcriptions. To address the scarcity of expressive labels, we propose an Iterative Self-Learning (ISL) framework for expressive TTS, built on Invert-Classify, a classifier-free method that recovers discrete expressive labels by inverting a frozen generative model. The framework iteratively pseudo-labels unlabeled speech using the current model, retrains on the combined labeled and pseudo-labeled data, and repeats, progressively refining label quality and synthesis. We validate on two expressive tasks, word-level prominence and utterance-level emotion, across multiple low-resource data splits. We find that iterative refinement can improve pseudo-label accuracy over single-pass baselines. Furthermore, we observe that these improvements in pseudo-labeling of expressivity translate to gains in expressive label adherence and synthesis quality, confirmed by objective metrics and human listening tests. In the most data-scarce conditions, ISL-trained models outperform single-pass pseudo-labeling and further approach fully supervised performance, demonstrating that gradient-based ISL is an effective solution to expressive label scarcity in low-resource TTS.
Figures & tables
| Prominence-labeled utterance |
|---|
| <NOTPROM> Abby <NOTPROM> went <NOTPROM> home |
| <PROM> Abby <NOTPROM> went <NOTPROM> home |
| <NOTPROM> Abby <PROM> went <NOTPROM> home |
| <NOTPROM> Abby <NOTPROM> went <PROM> home |
| Metric | 1% Control | 1% ISL | 5% Control | 5% ISL | 100% GT Ref. | Vocoded GT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotion Recognition | ||||||
| Emo2vec F1 Score | 26.58 | 29.87 | 39.38 | 49.58 | 45.95 | 69.32 |
| Prosody | ||||||
| F0 RMSE | 5.39 | 5.33 | 5.55 | 4.73 | 4.04 | 2.56 |
| MPM | 96.82 | 98.90 | 97.68 | 99.01 | 99.33 | 98.81 |
| Allosaurus SR | 84.46 | 89.49 | 87.79 | 89.37 | 92.86 | 95.26 |
| Metric | 0.5% Control | 0.5% ISL | 1% Control | 1% ISL | 100% GT Ref. | Vocoded GT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prosody | ||||||
| F0 RMSE | 2.66 | 2.57 | 2.68 | 2.91 | 2.55 | 2.01 |
| MPM | 97.15 | 96.87 | 96.72 | 98.65 | 97.06 | 98.51 |
| Allosaurus SR | 84.26 | 88.57 | 84.00 | 92.49 | 88.19 | 96.80 |
| HuBERT Token SR | 90.15 | 94.55 | 92.29 | 80.52 | 95.98 | 94.29 |
| TTSDS Prosody Average | 90.52 | 93.33 | 91.00 | 90.55 | 93.74 | 96.53 |
| Task | System A | System B | Preferred | Win Prob. (B) CI |
| Naver-Prosody (Word-Level Prominence) | ||||
| NP | 0.5% Control | 0.5% ISL | ISL | |
| NP | 1.0% Control | 1.0% ISL | ISL | |
| NP | 0.5% ISL | 1.0% ISL | Tie | |
| NP | 1.0% ISL | 100% GT Ref. | Tie | |
| NP | 100% GT Ref. | Vocoded GT | Vocoded GT | |