Hugging Face's logo

Datasets:
lab260
/
mos260

Tasks:
Text-to-Speech
Modalities:
Tabular
Text
Formats:
parquet
Languages:
Russian
Size:
1K - 10K
Libraries:
Datasets
pandas
Polars
License:
Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
mos260 / README.md
korallll's picture
korallll
Add contact: email + Telegram channel
3dd0116 verified
preview code
|
Raw History Blame Contribute Delete
2.51 kB
metadata 
license: mit
task_categories:
  - text-to-speech
language:
  - ru

Russian TTS MOS Evaluation Dataset

A curated Russian synthesized speech dataset with crowdsourced quality ratings.

Overview

This dataset contains Russian synthesized speech samples from multiple TTS systems and audio codec models, evaluated by human annotators via crowdsourcing. Quality ratings are provided in two dimensions: perceptual quality (MOS) and intelligibility (Int-MOS).

  • Language: Russian only
  • Sources: F5, FishSpeech, GPT-So-VITS, Tortoise, XTTS, EnCodec, WavTok, and internal encoder/decoder configurations
  • Format: Single Parquet file with embedded audio bytes
  • Access: Public

Usage

Load the dataset 

from datasets import load_dataset

ds = load_dataset("YOUR_ORG/YOUR_DATASET_NAME")

Or just use script load_data_tts.py

Read audio from bytes 

import io
import soundfile as sf

sample = ds["train"][0]

audio_array, sr = sf.read(io.BytesIO(sample["audio"]))

print(f"File:     {sample['filename']}")
print(f"MOS:      {sample['mos_mean']}")
print(f"Int-MOS:  {sample['int_mos_mean']}")

Data Structure

Each row corresponds to one audio file with aggregated scores from all annotators.

Column Type Description
inner_audio_id int Internal audio identifier from the labeling system
filename string Relative path to the audio file (e.g. F5/001234_RUSLAN.wav)
audio binary Raw audio bytes (wav)
mos_mean float or null Mean perceptual quality score (1–5); null if not rated
int_mos_mean float or null Mean intelligibility score (1–5); null if not rated
project string Source labeling project name

Evaluation Methodology

Ratings were collected via crowdsourcing across two independent evaluation tracks:

  • MOS — perceptual quality assessment following ITU-T P.800 (1 = bad, 5 = excellent)
  • Int-MOS — intelligibility assessment on the same 1–5 scale

Each sample may have one or both scores depending on which evaluation projects it was included in. A sample appearing in both tracks may carry two different inner_audio_id values — this is expected behavior from the labeling pipeline.

Model quality on unlabeled data was additionally estimated using Proxymos as a reference-free MOS predictor.

Contact