To Distill or Not to Distill? On the Robustness of Robust Knowledge Distillation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arabic is known to present unique challenges for Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR).On one hand, its rich linguistic diversity and wide range of dialects complicate the development of robust, inclusive models.On the other, current multilingual ASR models are compute-intensive and lack proper comprehensive evaluations.In light of these challenges, we distill knowledge from large teacher models into smaller student variants that are more efficient.We also introduce a novel human-annotated dataset covering five under-represented Arabic dialects for evaluation.We further evaluate both our models and existing SoTA multilingual models on both standard available benchmarks and our new dialectal data.Our best-distilled model's overall performance (45.0%WER) surpasses that of a SoTA model twice its size (SeamlessM4T-large-v2, WER=47.0%) and its teacher model (Whisper-large-v2, WER=55.1%), and its average performance on our new dialectal data (56.9%WER) outperforms all other models.To gain more insight into the poor performance of these models on dialectal data, we conduct an error analysis and report the main types of errors the different models tend to make.The GitHub repository for the project is available at https: //github.com/UBC-NLP/distill-whisper-ar.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it