SEA-HELM Audio: Evaluating Multilingual ASR-LLM Pipeline Performance Across SEA-HELM Subsets

The rapid advancement of audio and multimodal large language models has unlocked transformative speech understanding capabilities, yet evaluation frameworks remain predominantly English-centric, leaving Southeast Asian (SEA) languages critically underrepresented. We introduce SEA-SpeechBench, to the best of our knowledge, the first large-scale multitask benchmark that evaluates speech understanding in 11 SEA languages through 97,194 samples across 99 evaluation sets and 597 hours of curated audio data. Our benchmark comprises 9 diverse tasks across 3 categories: speech processing (automatic speech recognition, speech translation, spoken question answering), paralinguistic analysis (emotion, gender, age, speaker recognition), and temporal understanding, a novel dimension featuring timestamped content queries and temporal localization within extended audio sequences up to 3 minutes. We implement multilingual prompting in both native SEA languages and English to reflect user interactions with audio-language models. Evaluation of leading open-source and proprietary systems reveals marked performance gaps. Across all models, performance remains underwhelming on temporal understanding, emotion recognition, and speech translation. Prompting in low-resource languages such as Burmese and Tamil lags behind English by up to 41 percentage points. Our findings expose critical model limitations and underscore the need for inclusive model development. The SEA-SpeechBench benchmark is available at https://zwenyu.github.io/SEA-SpeechBench/.

Modern audio-language models are no longer judged only on what words they can transcribe, but on whether they can reason over what they hear: recovering meaning that lives in tone and prosody, telling dialects and regional languages apart, and resolving ambiguity that the written form leaves open. This capability is now measured by a growing family of audio-reasoning benchmarks, but almost entirely in English and on general-domain audio. Southeast Asia (SEA) is served instead by benchmarks that inherit an English task taxonomy of recognition, translation, and paralinguistic classification, and therefore test whether a model hears SEA speech rather than whether it can reason from it. We introduce SEABED, an audio-first question answering dataset designed to benchmark language and audio reasoning models on SEA speech. SEABED comprises a suite of six audio-reasoning tasks built entirely from real, openly available SEA speech corpora, yielding 5,404 question-answer pairs. We evaluate six frontier and region-specific audio LLMs: even the state-of-the-art model Gemini 3.5 Flash achieves only 50.3% weighted average accuracy. SEABED evaluates not only answer accuracy, but also whether models' stated reasoning is grounded in the audio evidence. A sample of the benchmark data is available here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/CentificAIResearch/SEABED.

Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems have achieved near-human accuracy on curated benchmarks, yet still fail in real-world voice agents under conditions that current evaluations do not systematically cover. Without diagnostic tools that isolate specific failure factors, practitioners cannot anticipate which conditions, in which languages, will cause what degree of degradation. We introduce WildASR, a multilingual (four-language) diagnostic benchmark sourced entirely from real human speech that factorizes ASR robustness along three axes: environmental degradation, demographic shift, and linguistic diversity. Evaluating seven widely used ASR systems, we find severe and uneven performance degradation, and model robustness does not transfer across languages or conditions. Critically, models often hallucinate plausible but unspoken content under partial or degraded inputs, creating concrete safety risks for downstream agent behavior. Our results demonstrate that targeted, factor-isolated evaluation is essential for understanding and improving ASR reliability in production systems. Besides the benchmark itself, we also present three analytical tools that practitioners can use to guide deployment decisions.