MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408113760 · doi:10.1121/10.0036052

Voice assistant technology continues to underperform on children's speech

2025· article· en· W4408113760 on OpenAlexafffund
Holly Bradley, Madeleine E. Yu, Elizabeth K. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJASA Express Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voice assistant (VA) technology is increasingly part of children's everyday lives. But how well do these systems understand children? No study has asked this with children under 5 years old. Here, two versions of Siri, and one of Alexa, were tested on their ability to transcribe utterances produced by 2-, 3-, and 5-year-olds. Human listeners (mothers and undergraduates) were also tested. Results showed that while Siri's performance on children's speech has improved in recent years, even the newest Siri and Alexa models struggle with children's speech. Human listeners far outperformed VA systems with all ages, especially with the youngest children's speech.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJASA Express LettersSame topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207