-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Questions About the Reported Numbers in Mutox #520
Comments
Hi ASMIftekhar!
Yes, this understanding is correct. |
Thanks for responding quickly. Can you please point to the source code you used for evaluating the performance? In specific, how did you calculate recall at a particular precision? Did you try different threshold values and select one that gives best precision and use that threshold to calculate recall? |
We didn't release the source code for the evaluation. |
@avidale Yes, that's exactly how we benchmarked it. Note that most languages are using a 0.3 precision threshold, with only spa, eng and deu working with 0.4~. |
Thanks a lot for the clarification, it was helpful. I can see you have provided public links to the data, unfortunately many of the links are not available anymore. Is it possible to share the extracted test/devtest data in some other ways? It would be extremely valuable to the community for creating a robust benchmark. |
@ASMIftekhar unfortunately, it is very difficult for us to publish speech data. |
Thanks, will try to do that. |
Sorry for reopenning the issue but the transcripts provided in the tsv file, are they human annotated transcripts? @avidale |
Hello @avidale,
Thanks a lot for releasing the audio toxicity benchmark. In the paper you reported performances from Mutox and ASR-Mutox. I am trying to understand their configurations. Based on my understanding Mutox only takes audio files as input and ASR-Mutox takes the whishper generated text transcripts as input, is this understanding correct?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: