Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Evaluating ASR Confidence Scores for Automated Error Detection in User-Assisted Correction Interfaces

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.15124 v1 pith:R5QZPJR5 submitted 2025-03-19 cs.HC cs.CLcs.SDeess.AS

Evaluating ASR Confidence Scores for Automated Error Detection in User-Assisted Correction Interfaces

classification cs.HC cs.CLcs.SDeess.AS
keywords confidencescoresdetectionerrorcorrectionerrorsresultsparticipants
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Despite advances in Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), transcription errors persist and require manual correction. Confidence scores, which indicate the certainty of ASR results, could assist users in identifying and correcting errors. This study evaluates the reliability of confidence scores for error detection through a comprehensive analysis of end-to-end ASR models and a user study with 36 participants. The results show that while confidence scores correlate with transcription accuracy, their error detection performance is limited. Classifiers frequently miss errors or generate many false positives, undermining their practical utility. Confidence-based error detection neither improved correction efficiency nor was perceived as helpful by participants. These findings highlight the limitations of confidence scores and the need for more sophisticated approaches to improve user interaction and explainability of ASR results.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.