arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.12327

Comparative Analysis of Multilingual Pre-trained Models for Nepali Automatic Speech Recognition

Suman Paudel·Sarbin Sayami
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multilingual pretrained models nominally support Nepali, yet no controlled benchmark has compared them under a single fine-tuning protocol. We fine-tune six pretrained models (XLSR-53, IndicWav2Vec, MMS-1B, Whisper-Medium, Whisper-Large-v3-Turbo, and Conformer-Hi) spanning CTC self-supervised, autoregressive encoder-decoder, and hybrid Conformer-CTC architectures, on the OpenSLR SLR54 Nepali corpus (~165 hours) using identical preprocessing, splits, optimizer, and family-matched learning-rate schedules. We evaluate Word Error Rate (WER), Character Error Rate (CER), and Real-Time Factor (RTF) on three independent test sets (OpenSLR, FLEURS, Common Voice). Whisper-Large-v3-Turbo (14.76% WER) and IndicWav2Vec (14.89% WER) tie at the top despite a 9x parameter gap and 40x pretraining-data gap, providing direct empirical evidence that language-family proximity in pretraining can substitute for raw scale for in-domain Nepali. CTC decoders run up to 29x faster than autoregressive Whisper at the same accuracy, flipping the practical deployment preference toward CTC under any latency budget. Massively multilingual pretraining (MMS-1B) yields the smallest out-of-domain degradation on FLEURS (+12.55 pp), indicating that scale buys robustness rather than peak in-domain accuracy. The resulting benchmark provides the first standardized, multi-model, efficiency-aware reference numbers for Nepali ASR.

Explore related subjects

cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Suman Paudel, Sarbin Sayami. 2026-05-31. Comparative Analysis of Multilingual Pre-trained Models for Nepali Automatic Speech Recognition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.12327

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

"You are an expert annotator": Automatic Best-Worst-Scaling Annotations for Emotion Intensity Modeling

Labeling corpora constitutes a bottleneck to create models for new tasks or domains. Large language models mitigate the issue with automatic corpus labeling methods, particularly for categorical annotations. Some NLP tasks such as emotion intensity prediction, however, require text regression, but there is no work on automating annotations for continuous label assignments. Regression is considered more challenging than classification: The fact that humans perform worse when tasked to choose values from a rating scale lead to comparative annotation methods, including best-worst scaling. This raises the question if large language model-based annotation methods show similar patterns, namely that they perform worse on rating scale annotation tasks than on comparative annotation tasks. To study this, we automate emotion intensity predictions and compare direct rating scale predictions, pairwise comparisons and best-worst scaling. We find that the latter shows the highest reliability. A transformer regressor fine-tuned on these data performs nearly on par with a model trained on the original manual annotations.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

A Systematic Review of NLP for Ghanaian Languages: Datasets, Models, and a Research Roadmap

Natural Language Processing (NLP) for Ghana's 73 living indigenous languages remains deeply fragmented, under-resourced, and heavily skewed toward a single language. We present the first systematic review of the Ghanaian NLP landscape, screening 17,000+ publications across four academic databases to critically synthesize 36 core studies spanning datasets, model architectures, and evaluation paradigms. Our analysis exposes a severe resource imbalance: Twi-centric NLP has grown modestly, driven largely by religious-text alignment and crowdsourcing, while the remaining 70+ languages remain almost entirely unaddressed, and dataset releases, model checkpoints, and evaluation practices remain inconsistent and rarely shared across the field. We translate these findings into a prioritized roadmap targeting Ghana's acute regional constraints, dialectal variation, non-standardized orthographies, and the absence of shared infrastructure, offering a replicable template for systematic review and research prioritization in other low-resource language settings.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Which Demographics do LLMs Default to During Annotation?

Demographics and cultural background of annotators influence the labels they assign in text annotation -- for instance, an elderly woman might find it offensive to read a message addressed to a "bro", but a male teenager might find it appropriate. It is therefore important to acknowledge label variations to not under-represent members of a society. Two research directions developed out of this observation in the context of using large language models (LLM) for data annotations, namely (1) studying biases and inherent knowledge of LLMs and (2) injecting diversity in the output by manipulating the prompt with demographic information. We combine these two strands of research and ask the question to which demographics an LLM resorts to when no demographics is given. To answer this question, we evaluate which attributes of human annotators LLMs inherently mimic. Furthermore, we compare non-demographic conditioned prompts and placebo-conditioned prompts (e.g., "you are an annotator who lives in house number 5") to demographics-conditioned prompts ("You are a 45 year old man and an expert on politeness annotation. How do you rate {instance}"). We study these questions for politeness and offensiveness annotations on the POPQUORN data set, a corpus created in a controlled manner to investigate human label variations based on demographics which has not been used for LLM-based analyses so far. We observe notable influences related to gender, race, and age in demographic prompting, which contrasts with previous studies that found no such effects.

cs.CL↗