Matched via arXiv identifier search · Community adoption signal (514 stars)
- Stars
- 514
- Last push
- May 16, 2026 (45d ago)
Risk flags
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
Kush Juvekar, Kavya Manohar, Aditya Srinivas Menon, Arghya Bhattacharya, Kumarmanas Nethil
No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Fine-tuning multilingual ASR models like Whisper for low-resource languages often improves read speech but degrades spontaneous audio performance, a phenomenon we term studio-bias. To diagnose this mismatch, we introduce Vividh-ASR, a complexity-stratified benchmark for Hindi and Malayalam across four tiers: studio, broadcast, spontaneous, and synthetic noise. Through a controlled study of learning-rate timing and cu ...
rriculum ordering, we find that early large parameter updates improve global WER by 12 absolute points, while a hard-to-easy curriculum adds gains for spontaneous speech. These findings motivate reverse multi-stage fine-tuning (R-MFT), a training recipe that enables a parameter-efficient 244M Whisper model to match or exceed conventionally fine-tuned 769M counterparts. Representational analysis via CKA and SVD reveals effective schedules concentrate adaptation in the decoder, preserving the pre-trained encoder's acoustic geometry. We release the benchmark and models.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LoRA | Whisper base | Effective Rank | 14 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| LoRA | IndicWhisper | Effective Rank | 25 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Fine-tuning multilingual ASR models like Whisper for low-resource languages often improves read speech but degrades spontaneous audio performance, a phenomenon we term studio-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 (514 stars)
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Partial 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:
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
LoRA
Methods
LoRA / Parameter-efficient tuning
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.