cs.CLAug 28, 2026

VoiceCodeBench: Evaluating Exact Structured-Token Recovery in Automatic Speech Recognition

Authors: Tyler Baumgartner, Brandon Tai, Lisa Kaelin-Martin, Candice Fan, Luc Debaupte, Bill Wang, Yi Zhong

Organizations: Besimple AI, San Mateo, CA, USA

Abstract

Automatic speech recognition is usually evaluated with word error rate (WER), although voice workflows often require exact written values. VoiceCodeBench measures whether transcripts preserve identifiers, paths, commands, and other structured tokens needed by downstream software. It contains 300 human-recorded English workplace segments (5.59 hours, 85 speakers) and 1,482 audited entities across 26 types and eight domains. Under a raw-audio-only protocol, we evaluate 19 batch and streaming systems using WER, Canonical Token/Entity Match (CTEM), and strict segment-level Task Success Rate (TSR). Across systems, WER has little rank agreement with CTEM (Spearman ρ=−0.28ρ=-0.28) or TSR (ρ=−0.22ρ=-0.22). The best CTEM and TSR are 91.8% and 68.7%. Even the strongest system therefore leaves nearly one-third of recordings with an unrecovered critical value. Symbol-, separator-, and boundary-sensitive entities account for most errors.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables1 asset

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

May 20, 2026

SCRIBE: Diagnostic Evaluation and Rich Transcription Models for Indic ASR

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.
Oct 17, 2026

Ask, Don't Guess: Targeted Clarification for Speech Recognition Errors

Speech recognition in real time in far-field conversational settings still incurs significant errors. Identifying potential error spans during streaming ASR permits a recourse mechanism where the speaker can be asked to repeat the affected content under cleaner acoustic conditions. We propose \sysname, a new framework for online error localization, that identifies spans likely to benefit from this intervention. Our supervision uses clean audio to estimate how the recognizer's output might change under improved acoustic conditions. We probabilistically align noisy and clean decodes using a pair-HMM to obtain soft supervision. These soft targets train a counterfactual gain scorer by combining a suite of acoustic and language features to produce token-level scores, that are further grouped into spans for targeted recourse. An LLM uses the ASR transcript of the repetition to revise only the selected span. At a precision of 70%70\%, \sysname achieves the highest recall by identifying up to 52% more erroneous tokens compared to the strongest baseline. Targeted repetition yields relative WER reductions of up to 24% under a budget that accounts for both interruption frequency and the lengths of re-uttered spans.
May 5, 2026

A Paradigm for Interpreting Metrics and Identifying Critical Errors in Automatic Speech Recognition

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.