Diagnose, Then Refine: A Closed-Loop TTS System with AudioLLM-Guided Correction
Authors: Zeyang Song, Tianchi Liu, Tianrui Wang, Chenglin Xu, Steven Y. Guo, Haizhou Li
Organizations: National University of Singapore · Tencent · LIGHTSPEED · Nanyang Technological University · Independent Researcher · The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen · Shenzhen Loop Area Institute
Current TTS systems typically rely on open-loop, single-pass generation and can produce sporadic local prosodic defects, such as misplaced stress, unnatural pauses, or flattened intonation, that utterance-level metrics often fail to expose. We present LoopTTS, a judge-guided Filter-Judge-Refiner framework for recovering low-quality TTS outputs diagnosed by an AudioLLM. Given an initial utterance from a base TTS model, an AudioLLM Judge identifies salient prosodic issues and generates structured refine instructions; a Refiner, our fine-grained instruction-following TTS model, then performs guided expressive re-synthesis conditioned on the initial utterance, target text, and instruction. To train the Refiner, we construct Refiner-DB, a 42K-example AudioLLM-annotated dataset with word-level prosodic weak supervision. Human evaluation on diagnosed low-quality utterances shows that LoopTTS can detect perceptually salient errors and correct them with the Refiner, outperforming raw generated audio and practical open-loop re-generation baselines in recovery quality. The Refiner also demonstrates stronger instruction-following ability for stress and pause control in targeted prosody modification.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the LoopTTS pipeline. Stage 1 (Filter): coarse-grained metrics (WER, UTMOS) discard catastrophically degraded outputs and trigger full re-generation. Stage 2 (Judge): an AudioLLM evaluates prosody naturalness and emotional fidelity, producing an overall score (1–10) along with structured refine instructions that specify both global attributes (emotion, speed, pitch) and local operations (stress, pause). Utterances meeting the threshold are accepted as final output. Stage 3 (Refiner): the Refiner takes the initial utterance together with the refine instructions and performs guided expressive re-synthesis, producing corrected speech with optional iterative refinement for residual defects.
Figure 2: Contrastive data construction for Refiner-DB . Each expressive recording ytgt is paired with a zero-shot neutral clone yneu synthesized from the same text and speaker with neutral emotion. Global style comes from dataset metadata; an AudioLLM compares the two utterances and outputs word-level prosodic differences (stress, pause) as structured JSON. Both sources are merged into a natural-language refine instruction I , yielding tuples (yneu,I,ytgt,T) . Full prompts are in Appendix I .
Figure 3: Refiner architecture and position-aware training objective. The Refiner takes a refine instruction I , the initial utterance yinit , and the target text T as input. Two losses are applied in training: a position-weighted CE loss LCE that amplifies gradients at stressed and pause positions, and a structural alignment loss Lstruct that aligns span-level consistency.
AudioLLM
Regular
Emotional
Gemini-3-flash Team et al. (2023)
3.1
3.2
Gemini-3-pro Team et al. (2023)
3.3
3.4
Kimi-Audio KimiTeam et al. (2025)
2.2
2.5
Qwen3-Omni Xu et al. (2025)
2.6
2.7
Qwen3-Omni Thinking Xu et al. (2025)
2.9
3.0
Table 1: Mean human–AudioLLM alignment scores (1–4). Higher is better.
Stress
Pause
AudioLLM
Rec.
F1
Rec.
F1
Gemini-3-flash
0.861
0.535
0.573
0.432
Gemini-3-pro
0.884
0.673
0.697
0.532
Kimi-Audio
0.588
0.438
0.440
0.316
Qwen3-Omni
0.613
0.441
0.487
0.330
Qwen3-Omni Thinking
0.667
0.465
0.478
0.325
Table 2: AudioLLM annotation quality (micro Recall and F1) against professional human labels. The labels mark salient stress and pause differences rather than exhaustive prosodic structure.
Figure 4: Blind paired preference evaluation on flagged utterances. Each paired comparison uses 30 samples.
Neutral
Emotional
Condition
WER ↓
SIM ↑
MOS ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
MOS ↑
Baseline
Before refinement
2.04
0.73
3.21 ±.15
2.11
0.69
3.01 ±.16
Re-generation (open-loop)
CosyVoice2 Du et al. (2024b)
1.95
0.71
3.45 ±.14
2.03
0.70
3.15 ±.15
EmoVoice Yang et al. (2025a)
1.83
0.68
3.90 ±.13
1.72
0.65
3.85 ±.12
Table 3: Pipeline recovery evaluation on Stage 2 flagged utterances under Neutral and Emotional conditions. LoopTTS uses Gemini-3-pro as the inference-time Judge, while LoopTTS -Q uses the same Refiner with the inference-time Judge changed to Qwen3-Omni Thinking.
Objective
Subjective
Model
WER ↓
SIM ↑
UTMOS ↑
MOS ↑
MOS-I ↑
Emo.
Pitch
Speed
Stress
Pause
CosyVoice2 †
–
0.72
3.40
2.21 ±.11
2.25 ±.12
2.31 ±.10
2.54 ±.09
2.15 ±.10
2.12 ±.09
CosyVoice2-marker
4.74
0.69
3.27
2.95 ±.16
3.02 ±.11
3.78 ±.12
3.46 ±.09
4.32 ±.07
3.88 ±.08
EmoVoice
2.81
0.67
3.86
4.32 ±.13
4.13 ±.11
3.45 ±.09
3.76 ±.08
3.83 ±.08
2.92 ±.09
Refiner
2.90
0.68
3.60
4.21 ±.14
4.04 ±.10
4.01 ±.10
4.13 ±.08
4.57 ±.07
4.28 ±.08
Table 4: Instruction-following comparison. † CosyVoice2 frequently reads the instruction text verbatim, making its WER not comparable.
Variant
WER ↓
MOS ↑
Avg. MOS-I ↑
Refiner
2.90
4.21 ±.13
4.21 ±.09
w/o Lstruct
2.78
4.06 ±.15
4.01 ±.09
w/o Position-Weighting
2.92
4.17 ±.14
4.13 ±.08
w/o Both
2.87
4.03 ±.14
3.75 ±.10
Table 5: Ablation: effect of loss components.
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
System
WER ↓
SIM ↑
UTMOS ↑
CosyVoice2
3.69
0.70
3.33
EmoVoice
3.65
0.65
3.31
LoopTTS (Stage 1)
2.94
0.74
3.76
CosyVoice2 re-generation
2.90
0.74
3.81
EmoVoice re-generation
2.81
0.72
3.79
Judge-reranked best-of-5
2.90
0.74
3.82
Appendix
Table 6: Objective evaluation on 3,000 emotional synthesis utterances. WER is computed via Whisper-large-v3-turbo; SIM is measured against the neutral speaker reference; UTMOS estimates perceptual quality.
Stage
# Utt.
Rate
Total
3,000
100.00%
Initial pass
2,367
78.90%
After regen.
2,753
91.76%
Stage 2 flagged
237
7.90%
After 1st refine
103
3.43%
Appendix
Table 7: Stage-level accounting for the large-scale LoopTTS cascade.
Corpus
# Tuples
Type
ESD
14,000
Emotional
RAVDESS
1,440
Emotional
SAVEE
480
Emotional
MESS
6,800
Emotional
EmoVoice-DB
17,280
Emotional
LibriTTS
2,000
Regular
Appendix
Table 8: Refiner-DB composition by source corpus.
Variant
WER ↓
SIM ↑
MOS ↑
Avg. MOS-I ↑
Refiner
2.90
0.68
4.21 ±.14
4.21 ±.09
w/o yinit
2.91
0.62
4.17 ±.12
3.94 ±.11
Appendix
Table 9: Ablation of conditioning on the initial utterance.
Setting
WER ↓
SIM ↑
Before refinement
1.92
0.68
With GT instruction
1.72
0.67
With counterfactual instruction
1.87
0.68
Appendix
Table 10: Objective results under counterfactual local stress/pause instructions.
Type
Wrong Exe. Rate
Corr. Pres. Rate
Stress
10%
34%
Pause
28%
52%
Appendix
Table 11: Professional annotation of counterfactual instruction execution. Exe. and Pres. denote execution and preservation.
Setting
Neutral
Emotional
WER ↓
SIM ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
1-round
1.86
0.66
1.79
0.65
2-round
1.85
0.64
1.80
0.61
3-round
1.85
0.60
1.80
0.58
Appendix
Table 12: Objective results with additional refinement rounds.
System
MOS
Emotion
Pause
Stress
Pitch
Speed
CosyVoice2
0.784
0.562
0.915
0.496
0.728
0.848
CosyVoice2-marker
0.549
0.588
0.943
0.598
0.729
0.865
EmoVoice
0.496
0.706
0.899
0.694
0.683
0.823
Refiner
0.791
0.679
0.886
0.677
0.744
0.835
Appendix
Table 13: ICC(2,k) reliability for MOS and MOS-I ratings.
System
Neutral SIM ↑
SIM-EXP ↑
CosyVoice2
0.72
0.65
EmoVoice
0.67
0.75
Refiner
0.68
0.77
Appendix
Table 14: Speaker similarity against a neutral reference and five same-speaker, same-emotion expressive references.
Figure 5: Screenshot of the web-based human annotation interface used for collecting prosodic ground-truth labels (Section 5.2 ). Annotators toggle between Stress and Pause modes, clicking words or inter-word gaps to mark stressed words (red) and pause positions (vertical bars). A live preview and free-text note field are provided below.
Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) can follow diverse instructions to synthesize speech in specified styles. However, complex instructions that require simultaneous control over pitch dynamics, speaking rate, and emotional tone often exceed what a single-pass generation can faithfully realize. While recent reasoning models have shown that intermediate "thinking" tokens improve output quality, this paradigm has been confined to the text modality. In this work, we extend reasoning to the audio token space by training a LALM with reinforcement learning to reason over its own speech output. The model first generates a draft speech as a form of audio-token reasoning, critiques its own generation by reflecting on the acoustic realization in text, and then produces a refined version conditioned on both the first-pass speech and the critique, all within a single model. After RL training, the refined two-hop outputs achieve a relative improvement of 7.15% on the InstructTTSEval benchmark, demonstrating the model's reflective ability.
Chee-En Yu, Yi-Cheng Lin, Sung-Feng Huang +4
Graduate Institute of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan · Graduate Institute of Communication Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan · NVIDIA Research 4 Artificial Intelligence Center of Research Excellence, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Long-form text-to-speech (TTS) enables multi-turn conversations with consistent prosody and higher quality voice cloning from longer reference audio. Recent open-weights autoregressive TTS models such as Qwen3-TTS and VoxCPM2 attain state-of-the-art word error rate (WER) and speaker similarity (SIM) on short-form prompts but significantly deteriorate when used with long-form prompts. We propose Localized Attention-Constrained Inference (LACI), an inference-only method to detect TTS errors in near real-time, roll back to the error onset and regenerate with temporary guardrails, adding negligible computational overhead. Using LACI, we improve worst-of-N WER across 10 RNG seeds for Qwen3-TTS-0.6B from 35.2% to 3.4% on prompts longer than 1500 words, even surpassing its short-form reliability of 5.4% on prompts with fewer than 500 words. To demonstrate the efficacy of LACI on voice cloning reliability, we propose a sliding-window version of the SIM metric that we call wSIM. wSIM exposes several novel failure patterns that are not captured by SIM. LACI improves worst-of-N wSIM from 0.01 to 0.47 on 120 seconds of reference audio while reducing the rate of catastrophic generations with WER above 30% from 26% to below 1%
Rongxiang Wang, Berkin Durmus, Aysegul Orhon +2
Argmax, Inc. · University of Virginia · Bilkent University
While generative text-to-speech (TTS) models approach human-level quality, monolithic metrics fail to diagnose fine-grained acoustic artifacts or explain perceptual collapse. To address this, we propose TTS-PRISM, a multi-dimensional diagnostic framework for Mandarin. First, we establish a 12-dimensional schema spanning stability to advanced expressiveness. Second, we design a targeted synthesis pipeline with adversarial perturbations and expert anchors to build a high-quality diagnostic dataset. Third, schema-driven instruction tuning embeds explicit scoring criteria and reasoning into an efficient end-to-end model. Experiments on a 1,600-sample Gold Test Set show TTS-PRISM outperforms generalist models in human alignment. Profiling six TTS paradigms establishes intuitive diagnostic flags that reveal fine-grained capability differences. TTS-PRISM is open-source, with code and checkpoints at https://github.com/xiaomi-research/tts-prism.
Xi Wang, Jie Wang, Xingchen Song +8
Tsinghua University, China · MiLM Plus, Xiaomi Inc., China · The University of Tokyo, Japan