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.

A Comprehensive Analysis of Tokenization and Self-Supervised Learning in End-to-End Automatic Speech Recognition applied on French Language

The performance of end-to-end automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems enables their increasing integration into numerous applications. While there are various benefits to such speech-to-text systems, the choice of hyperparameters and models plays a crucial role in their performance. Typically, these choices are determined by considering only the character (CER) and/or word error rate (WER) metrics. However, it has been shown in several studies that these metrics are largely incomplete and fail to adequately describe the downstream application of automatic transcripts. In this paper, we conduct a qualitative study on the French language that investigates the impact of subword tokenization algorithms and self-supervised learning models from different linguistic and acoustic perspectives, using a comprehensive set of evaluation metrics.

Evaluation of Automatic Speech Recognition Using Generative Large Language Models

Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) is traditionally evaluated using Word Error Rate (WER), a metric that is insensitive to meaning. Embedding-based semantic metrics are better correlated with human perception, but decoder-based Large Language Models (LLMs) remain underexplored for this task. This paper evaluates their relevance through three approaches: (1) selecting the best hypothesis between two candidates, (2) computing semantic distance using generative embeddings, and (3) qualitative classification of errors. On the HATS dataset, the best LLMs achieve 92--94\% agreement with human annotators for hypothesis selection, compared to 63\% for WER, also outperforming semantic metrics. Embeddings from decoder-based LLMs show performance comparable to encoder models. Finally, LLMs offer a promising direction for interpretable and semantic ASR evaluation.

A Benchmark of French ASR Systems Based on Error Severity

Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) transcription errors are commonly assessed using metrics that compare them with a reference transcription, such as Word Error Rate (WER), which measures spelling deviations from the reference, or semantic score-based metrics. However, these approaches often overlook what is understandable to humans when interpreting transcription errors. To address this limitation, a new evaluation is proposed that categorizes errors into four levels of severity, further divided into subtypes, based on objective linguistic criteria, contextual patterns, and the use of content words as the unit of analysis. This metric is applied to a benchmark of 10 state-of-the-art ASR systems on French language, encompassing both HMM-based and end-to-end models. Our findings reveal the strengths and weaknesses of each system, identifying those that provide the most comfortable reading experience for users.