The GENEA Challenge 2023: A large scale evaluation of gesture generation models in monadic and dyadic settings

This paper reports on the GENEA Challenge 2023, in which participating teams built speech-driven gesture-generation systems using the same speech and motion dataset, followed by a joint evaluation. This year's challenge provided data on both sides of a dyadic interaction, allowing teams to generate full-body motion for an agent given its speech (text and audio) and the speech and motion of the interlocutor. We evaluated 12 submissions and 2 baselines together with held-out motion-capture data in several large-scale user studies. The studies focused on three aspects: 1) the human-likeness of the motion, 2) the appropriateness of the motion for the agent's own speech whilst controlling for the human-likeness of the motion, and 3) the appropriateness of the motion for the behaviour of the interlocutor in the interaction, using a setup that controls for both the human-likeness of the motion and the agent's own speech. We found a large span in human-likeness between challenge submissions, with a few systems rated close to human mocap. Appropriateness seems far from being solved, with most submissions performing in a narrow range slightly above chance, far behind natural motion. The effect of the interlocutor is even more subtle, with submitted systems at best performing barely above chance. Interestingly, a dyadic system being highly appropriate for agent speech does not necessarily imply high appropriateness for the interlocutor. Additional material is available via the project website at https://svito-zar.github.io/GENEAchallenge2023/ .

Evaluating gesture-generation in a large-scale open challenge: The GENEA Challenge 2022

This paper reports on the second GENEA Challenge to benchmark data-driven automatic co-speech gesture generation. Participating teams used the same speech and motion dataset to build gesture-generation systems. Motion generated by all these systems was rendered to video using a standardised visualisation pipeline and evaluated in several large, crowdsourced user studies. Unlike when comparing different research papers, differences in results are here only due to differences between methods, enabling direct comparison between systems. The dataset was based on 18 hours of full-body motion capture, including fingers, of different persons engaging in a dyadic conversation. Ten teams participated in the challenge across two tiers: full-body and upper-body gesticulation. For each tier, we evaluated both the human-likeness of the gesture motion and its appropriateness for the specific speech signal. Our evaluations decouple human-likeness from gesture appropriateness, which has been a difficult problem in the field. The evaluation results are a revolution, and a revelation. Some synthetic conditions are rated as significantly more human-like than human motion capture. To the best of our knowledge, this has never been shown before on a high-fidelity avatar. On the other hand, all synthetic motion is found to be vastly less appropriate for the speech than the original motion-capture recordings. We also find that conventional objective metrics do not correlate well with subjective human-likeness ratings in this large evaluation. The one exception is the Fr\'echet gesture distance (FGD), which achieves a Kendall's tau rank correlation of around -0.5. Based on the challenge results we formulate numerous recommendations for system building and evaluation.

The GENEA Challenge 2022: A large evaluation of data-driven co-speech gesture generation

This paper reports on the second GENEA Challenge to benchmark data-driven automatic co-speech gesture generation. Participating teams used the same speech and motion dataset to build gesture-generation systems. Motion generated by all these systems was rendered to video using a standardised visualisation pipeline and evaluated in several large, crowdsourced user studies. Unlike when comparing different research papers, differences in results are here only due to differences between methods, enabling direct comparison between systems. This year's dataset was based on 18 hours of full-body motion capture, including fingers, of different persons engaging in dyadic conversation. Ten teams participated in the challenge across two tiers: full-body and upper-body gesticulation. For each tier we evaluated both the human-likeness of the gesture motion and its appropriateness for the specific speech signal. Our evaluations decouple human-likeness from gesture appropriateness, which previously was a major challenge in the field. The evaluation results are a revolution, and a revelation. Some synthetic conditions are rated as significantly more human-like than human motion capture. To the best of our knowledge, this has never been shown before on a high-fidelity avatar. On the other hand, all synthetic motion is found to be vastly less appropriate for the speech than the original motion-capture recordings. Additional material is available via the project website at https://youngwoo-yoon.github.io/GENEAchallenge2022/