Showing 1–8 of 8 results for author: Hutiri, W

How to Evaluate Automatic Speech Recognition: Comparing Different Performance and Bias Measures

Authors: Tanvina Patel, Wiebke Hutiri, Aaron Yi Ding, Odette Scharenborg

Abstract: There is increasingly more evidence that automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems are biased against different speakers and speaker groups, e.g., due to gender, age, or accent. Research on bias in ASR has so far primarily focused on detecting and quantifying bias, and developing mitigation approaches. Despite this progress, the open question is how to measure the performance and bias of a system… ▽ More There is increasingly more evidence that automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems are biased against different speakers and speaker groups, e.g., due to gender, age, or accent. Research on bias in ASR has so far primarily focused on detecting and quantifying bias, and developing mitigation approaches. Despite this progress, the open question is how to measure the performance and bias of a system. In this study, we compare different performance and bias measures, from literature and proposed, to evaluate state-of-the-art end-to-end ASR systems for Dutch. Our experiments use several bias mitigation strategies to address bias against different speaker groups. The findings reveal that averaged error rates, a standard in ASR research, alone is not sufficient and should be supplemented by other measures. The paper ends with recommendations for reporting ASR performance and bias to better represent a system's performance for diverse speaker groups, and overall system bias. △ Less

Submitted 8 July, 2025; originally announced July 2025.

TEDI: Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators to Analyze and Compare Dataset Documentation

Authors: Wiebke Hutiri, Mircea Cimpoi, Morgan Scheuerman, Victoria Matthews, Alice Xiang

Abstract: Dataset transparency is a key enabler of responsible AI, but insights into multimodal dataset attributes that impact trustworthy and ethical aspects of AI applications remain scarce and are difficult to compare across datasets. To address this challenge, we introduce Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators (TEDI) that facilitate the systematic, empirical analysis of dataset documentation. TEDI… ▽ More Dataset transparency is a key enabler of responsible AI, but insights into multimodal dataset attributes that impact trustworthy and ethical aspects of AI applications remain scarce and are difficult to compare across datasets. To address this challenge, we introduce Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators (TEDI) that facilitate the systematic, empirical analysis of dataset documentation. TEDI encompasses 143 fine-grained indicators that characterize trustworthy and ethical attributes of multimodal datasets and their collection processes. The indicators are framed to extract verifiable information from dataset documentation. Using TEDI, we manually annotated and analyzed over 100 multimodal datasets that include human voices. We further annotated data sourcing, size, and modality details to gain insights into the factors that shape trustworthy and ethical dimensions across datasets. We find that only a select few datasets have documented attributes and practices pertaining to consent, privacy, and harmful content indicators. The extent to which these and other ethical indicators are addressed varies based on the data collection method, with documentation of datasets collected via crowdsourced and direct collection approaches being more likely to mention them. Scraping dominates scale at the cost of ethical indicators, but is not the only viable collection method. Our approach and empirical insights contribute to increasing dataset transparency along trustworthy and ethical dimensions and pave the way for automating the tedious task of extracting information from dataset documentation in future. △ Less

Submitted 23 May, 2025; originally announced May 2025.

As Biased as You Measure: Methodological Pitfalls of Bias Evaluations in Speaker Verification Research

Authors: Wiebke Hutiri, Tanvina Patel, Aaron Yi Ding, Odette Scharenborg

Abstract: Detecting and mitigating bias in speaker verification systems is important, as datasets, processing choices and algorithms can lead to performance differences that systematically favour some groups of people while disadvantaging others. Prior studies have thus measured performance differences across groups to evaluate bias. However, when comparing results across studies, it becomes apparent that t… ▽ More Detecting and mitigating bias in speaker verification systems is important, as datasets, processing choices and algorithms can lead to performance differences that systematically favour some groups of people while disadvantaging others. Prior studies have thus measured performance differences across groups to evaluate bias. However, when comparing results across studies, it becomes apparent that they draw contradictory conclusions, hindering progress in this area. In this paper we investigate how measurement impacts the outcomes of bias evaluations. We show empirically that bias evaluations are strongly influenced by base metrics that measure performance, by the choice of ratio or difference-based bias measure, and by the aggregation of bias measures into meta-measures. Based on our findings, we recommend the use of ratio-based bias measures, in particular when the values of base metrics are small, or when base metrics with different orders of magnitude need to be compared. △ Less

Submitted 24 August, 2024; originally announced August 2024.

Comments: Accepted to Interspeech 2024 (oral)

Not My Voice! A Taxonomy of Ethical and Safety Harms of Speech Generators

Authors: Wiebke Hutiri, Oresiti Papakyriakopoulos, Alice Xiang

Abstract: The rapid and wide-scale adoption of AI to generate human speech poses a range of significant ethical and safety risks to society that need to be addressed. For example, a growing number of speech generation incidents are associated with swatting attacks in the United States, where anonymous perpetrators create synthetic voices that call police officers to close down schools and hospitals, or to v… ▽ More The rapid and wide-scale adoption of AI to generate human speech poses a range of significant ethical and safety risks to society that need to be addressed. For example, a growing number of speech generation incidents are associated with swatting attacks in the United States, where anonymous perpetrators create synthetic voices that call police officers to close down schools and hospitals, or to violently gain access to innocent citizens' homes. Incidents like this demonstrate that multimodal generative AI risks and harms do not exist in isolation, but arise from the interactions of multiple stakeholders and technical AI systems. In this paper we analyse speech generation incidents to study how patterns of specific harms arise. We find that specific harms can be categorised according to the exposure of affected individuals, that is to say whether they are a subject of, interact with, suffer due to, or are excluded from speech generation systems. Similarly, specific harms are also a consequence of the motives of the creators and deployers of the systems. Based on these insights we propose a conceptual framework for modelling pathways to ethical and safety harms of AI, which we use to develop a taxonomy of harms of speech generators. Our relational approach captures the complexity of risks and harms in sociotechnical AI systems, and yields a taxonomy that can support appropriate policy interventions and decision making for the responsible development and release of speech generation models. △ Less

Submitted 15 May, 2024; v1 submitted 25 January, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Comments: 17 pages, 4 tables, 4 figures Accepted at the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (ACM FAccT '24)

Benchmark Dataset Dynamics, Bias and Privacy Challenges in Voice Biometrics Research

Authors: Casandra Rusti, Anna Leschanowsky, Carolyn Quinlan, Michaela Pnacek, Lauriane Gorce, Wiebke Hutiri

Abstract: Speaker recognition is a widely used voice-based biometric technology with applications in various industries, including banking, education, recruitment, immigration, law enforcement, healthcare, and well-being. However, while dataset evaluations and audits have improved data practices in face recognition and other computer vision tasks, the data practices in speaker recognition have gone largely… ▽ More Speaker recognition is a widely used voice-based biometric technology with applications in various industries, including banking, education, recruitment, immigration, law enforcement, healthcare, and well-being. However, while dataset evaluations and audits have improved data practices in face recognition and other computer vision tasks, the data practices in speaker recognition have gone largely unquestioned. Our research aims to address this gap by exploring how dataset usage has evolved over time and what implications this has on bias, fairness and privacy in speaker recognition systems. Previous studies have demonstrated the presence of historical, representation, and measurement biases in popular speaker recognition benchmarks. In this paper, we present a longitudinal study of speaker recognition datasets used for training and evaluation from 2012 to 2021. We survey close to 700 papers to investigate community adoption of datasets and changes in usage over a crucial time period where speaker recognition approaches transitioned to the widespread adoption of deep neural networks. Our study identifies the most commonly used datasets in the field, examines their usage patterns, and assesses their attributes that affect bias, fairness, and other ethical concerns. Our findings suggest areas for further research on the ethics and fairness of speaker recognition technology. △ Less

Submitted 18 August, 2023; v1 submitted 7 April, 2023; originally announced April 2023.

Comments: 8 pages (10 with References)

Towards Trustworthy Edge Intelligence: Insights from Voice-Activated Services

Authors: W. T. Hutiri, A. Y. Ding

Abstract: In an age of surveillance capitalism, anchoring the design of emerging smart services in trustworthiness is urgent and important. Edge Intelligence, which brings together the fields of AI and Edge computing, is a key enabling technology for smart services. Trustworthy Edge Intelligence should thus be a priority research concern. However, determining what makes Edge Intelligence trustworthy is not… ▽ More In an age of surveillance capitalism, anchoring the design of emerging smart services in trustworthiness is urgent and important. Edge Intelligence, which brings together the fields of AI and Edge computing, is a key enabling technology for smart services. Trustworthy Edge Intelligence should thus be a priority research concern. However, determining what makes Edge Intelligence trustworthy is not straight forward. This paper examines requirements for trustworthy Edge Intelligence in a concrete application scenario of voice-activated services. We contribute to deepening the understanding of trustworthiness in the emerging Edge Intelligence domain in three ways: firstly, we propose a unified framing for trustworthy Edge Intelligence that jointly considers trustworthiness attributes of AI and the IoT. Secondly, we present research outputs of a tangible case study in voice-activated services that demonstrates interdependencies between three important trustworthiness attributes: privacy, security and fairness. Thirdly, based on the empirical and analytical findings, we highlight challenges and open questions that present important future research areas for trustworthy Edge Intelligence. △ Less

Submitted 19 June, 2022; originally announced June 2022.

Design Guidelines for Inclusive Speaker Verification Evaluation Datasets

Authors: Wiebke Toussaint Hutiri, Lauriane Gorce, Aaron Yi Ding

Abstract: Speaker verification (SV) provides billions of voice-enabled devices with access control, and ensures the security of voice-driven technologies. As a type of biometrics, it is necessary that SV is unbiased, with consistent and reliable performance across speakers irrespective of their demographic, social and economic attributes. Current SV evaluation practices are insufficient for evaluating bias:… ▽ More Speaker verification (SV) provides billions of voice-enabled devices with access control, and ensures the security of voice-driven technologies. As a type of biometrics, it is necessary that SV is unbiased, with consistent and reliable performance across speakers irrespective of their demographic, social and economic attributes. Current SV evaluation practices are insufficient for evaluating bias: they are over-simplified and aggregate users, not representative of real-life usage scenarios, and consequences of errors are not accounted for. This paper proposes design guidelines for constructing SV evaluation datasets that address these short-comings. We propose a schema for grading the difficulty of utterance pairs, and present an algorithm for generating inclusive SV datasets. We empirically validate our proposed method in a set of experiments on the VoxCeleb1 dataset. Our results confirm that the count of utterance pairs/speaker, and the difficulty grading of utterance pairs have a significant effect on evaluation performance and variability. Our work contributes to the development of SV evaluation practices that are inclusive and fair. △ Less

Submitted 13 September, 2022; v1 submitted 5 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: Accepted to INTERSPEECH 2022 (submitted version)

Bias in Automated Speaker Recognition

Authors: Wiebke Toussaint Hutiri, Aaron Ding

Abstract: Automated speaker recognition uses data processing to identify speakers by their voice. Today, automated speaker recognition is deployed on billions of smart devices and in services such as call centres. Despite their wide-scale deployment and known sources of bias in related domains like face recognition and natural language processing, bias in automated speaker recognition has not been studied s… ▽ More Automated speaker recognition uses data processing to identify speakers by their voice. Today, automated speaker recognition is deployed on billions of smart devices and in services such as call centres. Despite their wide-scale deployment and known sources of bias in related domains like face recognition and natural language processing, bias in automated speaker recognition has not been studied systematically. We present an in-depth empirical and analytical study of bias in the machine learning development workflow of speaker verification, a voice biometric and core task in automated speaker recognition. Drawing on an established framework for understanding sources of harm in machine learning, we show that bias exists at every development stage in the well-known VoxCeleb Speaker Recognition Challenge, including data generation, model building, and implementation. Most affected are female speakers and non-US nationalities, who experience significant performance degradation. Leveraging the insights from our findings, we make practical recommendations for mitigating bias in automated speaker recognition, and outline future research directions. △ Less

Submitted 19 June, 2022; v1 submitted 24 January, 2022; originally announced January 2022.

Journal ref: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT '22)