REVIEW 2 cited by
To train or not to train adversarially: A study of bias mitigation strategies for speaker recognition
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
To train or not to train adversarially: A study of bias mitigation strategies for speaker recognition
read the original abstract
Speaker recognition is increasingly used in several everyday applications including smart speakers, customer care centers and other speech-driven analytics. It is crucial to accurately evaluate and mitigate biases present in machine learning (ML) based speech technologies, such as speaker recognition, to ensure their inclusive adoption. ML fairness studies with respect to various demographic factors in modern speaker recognition systems are lagging compared to other human-centered applications such as face recognition. Existing studies on fairness in speaker recognition systems are largely limited to evaluating biases at specific operating points of the systems, which can lead to false expectations of fairness. Moreover, there are only a handful of bias mitigation strategies developed for speaker recognition systems. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the biases present in speaker recognition systems with respect to gender across a range of system operating points. We also propose adversarial and multi-task learning techniques to improve the fairness of these systems. We show through quantitative and qualitative evaluations that the proposed methods improve the fairness of ASV systems over baseline methods trained using data balancing techniques. We also present a fairness-utility trade-off analysis to jointly examine fairness and the overall system performance. We show that although systems trained using adversarial techniques improve fairness, they are prone to reduced utility. On the other hand, multi-task methods can improve the fairness while retaining the utility. These findings can inform the choice of bias mitigation strategies in the field of speaker recognition.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Toward Fair Speech Technologies: A Comprehensive Survey of Bias and Fairness in Speech AI
The paper delivers a unified framework for fairness in speech technologies by formalizing seven definitions, organizing research into three paradigms, diagnosing pipeline-specific biases, and mapping mitigations to th...
-
What You Train Is What You Get: Gender Bias, Training Composition, and Post-Hoc Mitigation in Audio Deepfake Detection
Underrepresented gender in training suffers higher deepfake-detection error; WavLM gaps stay large under balance, and all post-hoc calibrations leave the EER gap fixed at 1.317 pp.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.