Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research compares context biasing techniques against speech LLMs for handling rare words in automatic speech recognition, finding that simple biasing methods significantly outperform models on non-read data while maintaining accuracy elsewhere. The study highlights critical trade-offs between generalization capabilities and sensitivity to prompt structure when integrating large language models into ASR pipelines.
Sources coveringarXiv, AI Alignment Forum, Quantum Zeitgeist, Slack Blog
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

How to Recognize New Words: A Comparison Between Context Biasing Methods and Speech LLMs

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.05759v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recognizing new and rare words - named entities, acronyms, domain specific special words, and other items scarce in training data - remains a key challenge for automatic speech recognition (ASR). We compare two strategies for this: context biasing methods, where an ASR model is extended such that during inference a word list can be supplied, and speech large language models (LLMs) prompted with context directly. We evaluate two context biasing methods based on Whisper against three speech LLMs across read and non-read speech, reporting biased, unbiased, and overall word error rate (WER). The context biasing methods cut biased WER by up to 88% relative while leaving other words largely unaffected. Speech LLMs excel on read speech but generalize less well to non-read speech, and prove sensitive to distractor count and prompt word order. We characterize the resulting trade-offs to guide method selection.

Abstract:Recognizing new and rare words - named entities, acronyms, domain specific special words, and other items scarce in training data - remains a key challenge for automatic speech recognition (ASR). We compare two strategies for this: context biasing methods, where an ASR model is extended such that during inference a word list can be supplied, and speech large language models (LLMs) prompted with context directly. We evaluate two context biasing methods based on Whisper against three speech LLMs across read and non-read speech, reporting biased, unbiased, and overall word error rate (WER). The context biasing methods cut biased WER by up to 88% relative while leaving other words largely unaffected. Speech LLMs excel on read speech but generalize less well to non-read speech, and prove sensitive to distractor count and prompt word order. We characterize the resulting trade-offs to guide method selection.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2608.05759 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2608.05759v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.05759 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 237 words

Related coverage