Beyond Word Error Rate: Auditing the Diversity Tax in Speech Recognition through Dataset Cartography
Authors: Ting-Hui Cheng, Line H. Clemmensen, Sneha Das
Organizations: Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark · Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems are predominantly evaluated using the Word Error Rate (WER). However, raw token-level metrics fail to capture semantic fidelity and routinely obscures the `diversity tax', the disproportionate burden on marginalized and atypical speaker due to systematic recognition failures. In this paper, we explore the limitations of relying solely on lexical counts by systematically evaluating a broader class of non-linear and semantic metrics. To enable rigorous model auditing, we introduce the sample difficulty index (SDI), a novel metric that quantifies how intrinsic demographic and acoustic factors drive model failure. By mapping SDI on data cartography, we demonstrate that metrics EmbER and SemDist expose hidden systemic biases and inter-model disagreements that WER ignores. Finally, our findings are the first steps towards a robust audit framework for prospective safety analysis, empowering developers to audit and mitigate ASR disparities prior to deployment.
Figures & tables
Example
Metric
WER
CER
MER
WIL
EmbER
SemDist
Level
word
character
word
word
word
sentence
Range
[0,∞)
[0,∞)
[0,100]
[0,100]
[0,∞)
[0,∞]
Usage%
86.56%
35.41%
0.66%
0.33%
0.33%
1.31%
Ref: ..go meet..
0.014
0.009
0.014
0.014
1.429
0.073
Pred: ..go to meet..
Ref: ..Ask her..
0.014
0.006
0.014
0.014
1.429
0.188
Table 1: Overview of ASR evaluation metrics, including unit level, value range, and usage in Interspeech papers over the past three years, alongside examples of reference and predicted transcriptions from the Speech Accent Archive. Bold indicates the worst (highest) score in each column. Italics highlight values that are identical to at least one other value in the same column, showing where metrics fail to distinguish between corpora.
Figure 1: Characteristics of datasets as averages or ratios.
Figure 2: A) Mean and std error of β,α coefficients from the fixed effect (FE) model for the demographic and acoustic characteristics. B) Mean Coefficients from FE of models and datasets; C) Summary of the FE model fit statistics across the six metrics.
Figure 3: Latent space mapping of ASR performance using Principal Component Analysis. Axes are truncated to highlight the primary variance clusters.
Figure 4: Cartography plots mapping mean error ( μ ) against inter-model disagreement ( σ ), colored by SDI decile (1 = Easiest, 10 = Hardest). SDI Deciles divide the dataset’s speech samples into ten equal tiers based on their calculated intrinsic difficulty, ranging from 1 (the easiest samples for models to transcribe) to 10 (the hardest).
Figure 5: Cartography plots of mean EmbER error ( μ ) against inter-model disagreement ( σ ) across ASR systems using the EmbER metric. The μ reflects the overall recognition difficulty of each sample, while σ captures the extent of ambiguity, indicating how consistently different ASR models perform on the same utterance.
Word Error Rate (WER), the most commonly used metric for Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), treats every lexical deviation from the reference as equally costly, regardless of whether it changes meaning. This raises the question: does WER actually track how humans judge ASR transcript quality? We introduce HATS-en, an English dataset for human-centered ASR evaluation. Using this dataset, we benchmark lexical metrics against several configurations of BERTScore and SemDist, varying the language model, layer, and pooling strategy. We find that WER agrees least with human judgment among all metrics tested, that the best-performing SemDist configurations achieve the highest overall agreement, ahead of CER and BERTScore, and that no single model is best across settings. CER, despite its simplicity and low cost, remains remarkably close to these best configurations. In line with prior recommendations, our results support shifting ASR evaluation toward CER both for English and for morphosyllabic writing systems as it is a more interpretable and low-cost metric for what evaluation should actually capture, and using SemDist as a complementary evaluation.
ASR systems exhibit persistent performance disparities across accents, but whether these gaps reflect superficial biases or deep structural vulnerabilities remains unclear. We introduce ACES, a three-stage audit that extracts accent-discriminative subspaces from ASR representations, constrains adversarial attacks to them, and tests whether removing them improves fairness. On Wav2Vec2-base with seven accents, imperceptible perturbations (~60 dB SNR) along the accent subspace amplify the WER disparity gap by nearly 50% (21.3->31.8 pp), exceeding random-subspace controls; a permuted-label test confirms specificity to genuine accent structure. Partially removing the subspace worsens both WER and disparity, revealing that accent-discriminative and recognition-critical features are deeply entangled. ACES thus positions accent subspaces as powerful fairness-auditing tools, not simple erasure levers.
Advances in deep learning and end-to-end Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) have enabled robust multilingual models, but evaluation metrics remain limited in assessing accuracy. Efforts to improve or replace the common metric Word Error Rate (WER) often focus on English, leaving evaluations for low-resource languages under-explored and hindering fair cross-lingual comparisons. We present OpenWER, an open-source implementation that improves WER robustness through language-specific normalisation and compound word detection. A token-based Levenshtein alignment preserves complementary metrics and allows metadata embedding for granular accuracy scores. Our analysis of 52 languages shows absolute WER reductions of up to 25% compared to common libraries. OpenWER contributes to fairness in ASR research by increasing the reliability of WER across diverse languages and enabling more comprehensive accuracy evaluations.
Korbinian Kuhn, Gottfried Zimmermann
Stuttgart Media University, Germany · University of Tübingen, Germany