Repetition, Not Length: Isolating the Counting Failure in Neural Text-to-Speech

Kirill Borodin, Vasilii Kudryavtsev, Maxim Maslov, Grach Mkrtchian
9/29/2026
cs.CLcs.SD

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Text-to-speech models loop, truncate and lose count on text that repeats a phrase many times. We show that repetition itself is what breaks them, not the length that comes with it. Every repeated sentence in our test set is paired with a control of matched sentence and word count in which no word ever repeats back-to-back. Six models from three architectures render the controls almost perfectly and fail the repeated twins: 94.3% against 18.2% exactly right at k >= 6. The gap survives greedy decoding, repetition-penalty sweeps, four independent speech recognisers and 420 analysis specifications without once reversing sign; a held-out fourth architecture lands within a point of its predicted gap, and one of two non-autoregressive baselines shows the same failure. Varying the period of the text shows the failure grows smoothly with periodicity, half of it surviving when no word is adjacent to itself.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{borodin2026repetition,
  title  = {Repetition, Not Length: Isolating the Counting Failure in Neural Text-to-Speech},
  author = {Kirill Borodin and Vasilii Kudryavtsev and Maxim Maslov and Grach Mkrtchian},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2609.36974},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.36974v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2609.36974.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2609.36974)

Discussion