uDistil-Whisper: Label-Free Data Filtering for Knowledge Distillation in Low-Data Regimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work on distilling Whisper's knowledge into small models using pseudo-labels shows promising performance while reducing the size by up to 50%. This results in small, efficient, and dedicated models. However, a critical step of distillation using pseudo-labels involves filtering high-quality predictions and using only those during training. This step requires ground truth labels to compare with and filter low-quality examples, making the process dependent on human labels. Additionally, the distillation process requires a large amount of data thereby limiting its applicability in low-resource settings. To address this, we propose a distillation framework that does not require any labeled data. Through experimentation, we show that our best-distilled models outperform the teacher model by 5-7 WER points and are on par with or outperform similar supervised data filtering setups. When scaling the data, our models significantly outperform all zero-shot and supervised models. Our models are also 25-50% more compute- and memory-efficient while maintaining performance equal to or better than that of the teacher model. For more details about our models, dataset, and other resources, please visit our GitHub page: https://github.com/UBC-NLP/uDistilWhisper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.008 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".