Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.23114

Speech Language Models for Full-Meeting Speaker Diarization: Capabilities and Limitations

Abstract

Recent advances in Speech Language Models (SpeechLMs), which integrate large language models with speech foundation models, have enabled unified sequence modeling of speech processing tasks. However, many SpeechLM-based approaches to speaker diarization (SD) are tightly coupled with automatic speech recognition (ASR) and evaluated using word-level metrics, making it difficult to assess SD performance independent of ASR accuracy. In this work, we investigate ESPnet-SpeechLM as a token-based backbone for generating SD hypotheses, formulating SD as autoregressive generation of structured tokens conditioned on acoustic input. We systematically compare two output representations: an event-based representation that explicitly models speaker turn onset and offset timestamps, and a frame-based representation that predicts frame-level speaker activity. To provide structured conversational cues, we further incorporate auxiliary tasks including speech activity detection, overlapped speech detection, and speaker turn counting within the output sequence. Across multiple meeting datasets, we find that event-based representations produce more stable and consistent SD outputs than frame-based representations. Our analysis shows that outputs generated by SpeechLMs encode useful temporal SD structure, but full-meeting SD remains limited by recording-level speaker tracking and overlap-related misses. Explicit speaker-linking post-processing substantially reduces speaker confusion, suggesting that robust SpeechLM-based SD requires persistent speaker tracking and overlap-aware generation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jialu Li, Jinchuan Tian, Shinji Watanabe. 2026-09-19. Speech Language Models for Full-Meeting Speaker Diarization: Capabilities and Limitations. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.23114

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

NVV-Locator: From Transcript Tags to Acoustic Boundaries for Fine-Grained Nonverbal Vocalization Grounding

Human speech includes nonverbal vocalizations (NVVs), such as laughter, sighs, breaths, and coughs, which convey affective and interactional information. Existing approaches typically represent NVVs as transcript-level tags, providing limited supervision for their waveform-time boundaries. We present NVV-Locator for fine-grained NVV temporal grounding. We first unify 26 NVV categories across public resources and construct large-scale timestamp-supervised training data through dual-LLM verification, transcript-guided forced alignment, and energy-based boundary refinement. We further introduce NVV-TimeBench, an expert-refined benchmark with 667 utterances and 1,094 events. NVV-Locator uses a non-autoregressive slot-filling architecture to jointly predict lexical timestamps, NVV categories, and event boundaries. On NVV-TimeBench, it achieves 71.0% Micro F1, 70.2% Macro F1, 80.4% Macro mIoU, and 59.6 ms Macro mMAE, outperforming the evaluated large audio model counterparts. Evaluation on an external corpus further demonstrates the cross-corpus generalization of NVV-Locator.

eess.AS↗

Attendance-guided speaker enrollment across meetings

Speaker-aware applications rely on enrolled voice profiles, yet collecting enrollment speech from every participant is impractical. Meeting archives provide an alternative source of enrollment speech, comprising recordings of recurring participants paired with expected attendance lists. We investigate whether expected attendance lists can be cross-referenced with diarized anonymous speaker clusters to identify reliable enrollment speech for recurring participants. The resulting task, multi-participant automatic enrollment, must accommodate two types of attendance noise: a listed participant may not speak, and a speaker may be unlisted. To this end, we introduce a benchmark for the task: a synthetic corpus calibrated to an in-house meeting corpus, paired with a contamination-sensitive evaluation protocol. The reference method we introduce scores cross-session cluster chains against expected-attendance patterns and abstains when the evidence is insufficient. We quantify the reference method's benchmark performance as a trade-off between enrollment success and contamination. Applying synthetic-development thresholds unchanged to real meetings exposes a synthetic-to-real gap that remains an open challenge. We will release the benchmark generator and evaluation code.

eess.AS↗

VeriSpoof: Beyond Real or Fake with One Audio LLM

A speech deepfake detector estimates whether a recording is synthetic, but a forensic analyst also asks which system produced it, whether recordings share a source, and what evidence supports each conclusion. We present VeriSpoof, an audio language model that unifies five tasks with shared weights: deepfake detection, generator attribution (generator, acoustic model and vocoder), recording-condition analysis, synthesized-span localisation, and source verification. Each decision is supported by grounded rationales whose statements can be independently verified. Answers are scored by sentence likelihood, allowing detection and source verification to be thresholded without separate heads. Rationale statements can be checked against waveform measurements, span labels, or generator metadata. Counterfactual examples train decisions to follow the stated evidence. Across the 14 Speech-DF-Arena test sets, VeriSpoof-Plus achieves 2.14% pooled EER, ranking third of 28 systems and first among open-weight systems. VeriSpoof-Base, trained only on official training splits of eight corpora, achieves 4.43% EER, less than half that of the next open-weight detector. With the same weights, VeriSpoof-Plus verifies whether recordings from generators unseen in training share a source at 6.2% EER. Controlled studies show that the audio representation governs detection, the LLM governs recording comparison, and source supervision is necessary for neural-codec fakes. Statement-checkable rationales catch partial fakes missed by one-step answers (99.6% vs. 78.4% on PartialEdit) and determine decisions under edits unseen in training (99.5%). Training updates only 29.7M of 2.85B parameters, fitting a single 24 GB GPU with gradient checkpointing. We release both models, inference code, a demo, and VeriSpoof-Bench, the evaluation suite covering these questions.

eess.AS↗