Paper detail

Investigating data partitioning strategies for crosslinguistic low-resource ASR evaluation

Many automatic speech recognition (ASR) data sets include a single pre-defined test set consisting of one or more speakers whose speech never appears in the training set. This "hold-speaker(s)-out" data partitioning strategy, however, may not be ideal for data sets in which the number of speakers is very small. This study investigates ten different data split methods for five languages with minimal ASR training resources. We find that (1) model performance varies greatly depending on which speaker is selected for testing; (2) the average word error rate (WER) across all held-out speakers is comparable not only to the average WER over multiple random splits but also to any given individual random split; (3) WER is also generally comparable when the data is split heuristically or adversarially; (4) utterance duration and intensity are comparatively more predictive factors of variability regardless of the data split. These results suggest that the widely used hold-speakers-out approach to ASR data partitioning can yield results that do not reflect model performance on unseen data or speakers. Random splits can yield more reliable and generalizable estimates when facing data sparsity.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.