{"title":"Automatic speech recognition and the transcription of indistinct forensic audio: how do the new generation of systems fare?","authors":"Debbie Loakes","doi":"10.3389/fcomm.2024.1281407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study provides an update on an earlier study in the “Capturing Talk” research topic, which aimed to demonstrate how automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems work with indistinct forensic-like audio, in comparison with good-quality audio. Since that time, there has been rapid technological advancement, with newer systems having access to extremely large language models and having their performance proclaimed as being human-like in accuracy. This study compares various ASR systems, including OpenAI’s Whisper, to continue to test how well automatic speaker recognition works with forensic-like audio. The results show that the transcription of a good-quality audio file is at ceiling for some systems, with no errors. For the poor-quality (forensic-like) audio, Whisper was the best performing system but had only 50% of the entire speech material correct. The results for the poor-quality audio were also generally variable across the systems, with differences depending on whether a .wav or .mp3 file was used and differences between earlier and later versions of the same system. Additionally, and against expectations, Whisper showed a drop in performance over a 2-month period. While more material was transcribed in the later attempt, more was also incorrect. This study concludes that forensic-like audio is not suitable for automatic analysis.","PeriodicalId":31739,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1281407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study provides an update on an earlier study in the “Capturing Talk” research topic, which aimed to demonstrate how automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems work with indistinct forensic-like audio, in comparison with good-quality audio. Since that time, there has been rapid technological advancement, with newer systems having access to extremely large language models and having their performance proclaimed as being human-like in accuracy. This study compares various ASR systems, including OpenAI’s Whisper, to continue to test how well automatic speaker recognition works with forensic-like audio. The results show that the transcription of a good-quality audio file is at ceiling for some systems, with no errors. For the poor-quality (forensic-like) audio, Whisper was the best performing system but had only 50% of the entire speech material correct. The results for the poor-quality audio were also generally variable across the systems, with differences depending on whether a .wav or .mp3 file was used and differences between earlier and later versions of the same system. Additionally, and against expectations, Whisper showed a drop in performance over a 2-month period. While more material was transcribed in the later attempt, more was also incorrect. This study concludes that forensic-like audio is not suitable for automatic analysis.