Xiaoyong Guo, Nanjie Li, Zijie Zeng, Kai Wang, Hao Huang, Haihua Xu, Wei Shi
No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Contextual automatic speech recognition (ASR) with Speech-LLMs is typically trained with oracle conversation history, but relies on error-prone history at inference, causing a train-test mismatch in the context channel that we term contextual exposure bias. We propose a unified training framework to improve robustness under realistic histories: (i) Teacher Error Knowledge by using Whisper large-v3 hypotheses as train ...
ing-time history, (ii) Context Dropout to regularize over-reliance on history, and (iii) Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) on curated failure cases. Experiments on TED-LIUM 3 (in-domain) and zero-shot LibriSpeech (out-of-domain) show consistent gains under predicted-history decoding. With a two-utterance history as context, SFT with Whisper hypotheses reduce WER from 5.59% (oracle-history training) to 5.47%, and DPO further improves to 5.17%. Under irrelevant-context attacks, DPO yields the smallest degradation (5.17% -> 5.63%), indicating improved robustness to misleading context. Our code and models are published on https://github.com/XYGuo1996/Contextual_Speech_LLMs.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mitigating Contextual Exposure Bias Speech-llms | LibriSpeech | WER | 3 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Mitigating Contextual Exposure Bias Speech-llms | TED-LIUM 3 and out-of-domain Librispeech | WER | 3 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Contextual automatic speech recognition (ASR) with Speech-LLMs is typically trained with oracle conversation history, but relies on error-prone history at inference, causing a train-test mismatch in the context channel that we term contextual exposure bias.
This is primarily a method paper. Reproduce it within a maintained framework baseline instead of chasing paper-specific repos.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 90/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Community adoption signal (513 stars)
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
No verified implementation available
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Models
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Mitigating Contextual Exposure Bias Speech-llms
Methods
Reinforcement learning
Domains
None detected
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.