PiDA: Phonetically-Informed Data Augmentation for Robust Vietnamese Speech Translation

Cascaded speech translation (ST) systems suffer from error propagation when Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) outputs incorrect transcripts. We present the first systematic categorization of ASR errors for Vietnamese ST, classifying substitution errors by phonetic cause and quantifying their impact on downstream Neural Machine Translation (NMT) performance using Linear Mixed-Effects Modelling. We confirm that most ASR substitution errors arise from phonetic confusions rather than random noise, and that these phonetic errors significantly degrade ST quality. Motivated by this finding, we propose Phonetically-Informed Data Augmentation (PiDA), which generates ASR-like corruptions by substituting words with phonetically similar alternatives using phonetic word embeddings. Fine-tuning on a PiDA-augmented version of FLEURS Vietnamese-English improves translation of erroneous ASR outputs (up to +2.04 BLEU over standard fine-tuning) while also slightly improving clean-text performance.

An Online Reference-Free Evaluation Framework for Flowchart Image-to-Code Generation

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly used in document processing pipelines to convert flowchart images into structured code (e.g., Mermaid). In production, these systems process arbitrary inputs for which no ground-truth code exists, making output quality difficult to assess. We propose a reference-free evaluation framework that monitors flowchart image-to-code generation quality at inference time, using only the input image and the generated output. The framework introduces two automated metrics: $\text{Recall}{\text{OCR}}$, which estimates content coverage by extracting text from the input image via OCR as a proxy reference, and $\text{Precision}{\text{VE}}$, which detects hallucinated elements through Visual Entailment against the original image. Their harmonic mean, $\text{F1}{\text{OCR-VE}}$, provides a unified quality score. Validation on the FlowVQA dataset shows strong agreement with ground-truth metrics (average Pearson's $r = 0.97$, $0.91$, and $0.94$ for Recall, Precision, and F1, respectively), confirming the framework's reliability as a practical, reference-free alternative for continuous quality monitoring in production settings.