Automatic speech recognition replaces typing only when correction costs less than manual entry - a threshold determined by error types, not counts: fixing a misrecognized domain term costs far more than inserting a comma. Word error rate (WER) fails on two fronts: it collapses distinct error categories into a single scalar, and it structurally penalizes agglutinative languages where valid sandhi merges inflate scores. We introduce SCRIBE, a diagnostic framework offering categorical error decomposition into lexical, punctuation, numeral, and domain-entity rates via sandhi-tolerant alignment with domain vocabulary injection. Human validation confirms SCRIBE aligns with expert judgment where WER does not. We release SCRIBE, an LLM curation pipeline, benchmarks, and open-weight rich transcription models for Hindi, Malayalam, and Kannada.
The most commonly used metrics for evaluating automatic speech transcriptions, namely Word Error Rate (WER) and Character Error Rate (CER), have been heavily criticized for their poor correlation to human perception and their inability to take into account linguistic and semantic information. While metric-based embeddings, seeking to approximate human perception, have been proposed, their scores remain difficult to interpret, unlike WER and CER. In this article, we overcome this problem by proposing a paradigm that consists in incorporating a chosen metric into it in order to obtain an equivalent of the error rate: a Minimum Edit Distance (minED). This approach parallels transcription errors with their human perception, also allowing an original study of the severity of these errors from a human perspective.
Thibault Bañeras-Roux, Mickael Rouvier, Jane Wottawa +1
Evaluating automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems is a classical but difficult and still open problem, which often boils down to focusing only on the word error rate (WER). However, this metric suffers from many limitations and does not allow an in-depth analysis of automatic transcription errors. In this paper, we propose to study and understand the impact of rescoring using language models in ASR systems by means of several metrics often used in other natural language processing (NLP) tasks in addition to the WER. In particular, we introduce two measures related to morpho-syntactic and semantic aspects of transcribed words: 1) the POSER (Part-of-speech Error Rate), which should highlight the grammatical aspects, and 2) the EmbER (Embedding Error Rate), a measurement that modifies the WER by providing a weighting according to the semantic distance of the wrongly transcribed words. These metrics illustrate the linguistic contributions of the language models that are applied during a posterior rescoring step on transcription hypotheses.
Thibault Bañeras-Roux, Mickaël Rouvier, Jane Wottawa +1
Audio transcription is a critical bottleneck in language documentation. While multilingual Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) models like Whisper offer solutions, field linguists often lack the expertise to utilise them. We present Easper, an open-source, no-code workflow enabling linguists to iteratively fine-tune ASR models via cloud resources directly from ELAN annotations. Deploying ASR also raises a cold start problem: deciding which recordings to transcribe first to bootstrap an accurate model. Using Easper, we evaluate transcription prioritisation strategies on three Vanuatu languages (Bislama, Nafsan, Nguna). We fine-tune models by recording session, comparing Character Error Rate trajectories when prioritising acoustic cleanliness versus linguistic richness. We demonstrate that prioritising lexically rich narratives and increasing acoustic-phonetic repetition, even in noisy environments, leads to faster improvements in transcription quality.