A Probe Shift Is Not a Fairness Fix: The Limits of Representation Steering in Speech Models
Read the original on Hugging Face Trending Papers →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
arXiv:2609.18533v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems exhibit unequal error rates across speaker groups, motivating interventions on their internal representation...
arXiv:2609.27382v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Speech technology penalizes some voices: recognition errs nearly twice as often for Black speakers, and accuracy declines for second-language accents...
Speech technology penalizes some voices: recognition errs nearly twice as often for Black speakers, and accuracy declines for second-language accents and older speakers. We introduce TRIAD, an audit g...
The paper investigates how post‑training compression techniques—such as pruning, quantization, and distillation—affect demographic fairness in Whisper speech‑recognition models. It finds that pruning and INT4 quantization significantly widen word‑error‑rate gaps between demographic groups, especially for Black/AA and Asian speakers, while distillation tends to reduce these gaps. The study introduces a temporal‑taxation metric to quantify the increased correction effort required for marginalized speakers after compression.
arXiv:2609.38976v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Demographic fairness gaps in automatic speech recognition are almost always reported from a single training run. We fine-tune the Q-former projector an...
arXiv:2609.36500v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Speaker verification systems encounter combinations of noise, channel distortion, and changes in speech. Evaluating each condition separately does no...