Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Benchmark Dataset Dynamics, Bias and Privacy Challenges in Voice Biometrics Research

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 2304.03858 v4 pith:WOMSSB3P submitted 2023-04-07 cs.CY cs.SDeess.AS

classification cs.CYcs.SDeess.AS
keywords recognitionspeakerbiasdatasetdatasetsfairnessresearchusage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Speaker recognition is a widely used voice-based biometric technology with applications in various industries, including banking, education, recruitment, immigration, law enforcement, healthcare, and well-being. However, while dataset evaluations and audits have improved data practices in face recognition and other computer vision tasks, the data practices in speaker recognition have gone largely unquestioned. Our research aims to address this gap by exploring how dataset usage has evolved over time and what implications this has on bias, fairness and privacy in speaker recognition systems. Previous studies have demonstrated the presence of historical, representation, and measurement biases in popular speaker recognition benchmarks. In this paper, we present a longitudinal study of speaker recognition datasets used for training and evaluation from 2012 to 2021. We survey close to 700 papers to investigate community adoption of datasets and changes in usage over a crucial time period where speaker recognition approaches transitioned to the widespread adoption of deep neural networks. Our study identifies the most commonly used datasets in the field, examines their usage patterns, and assesses their attributes that affect bias, fairness, and other ethical concerns. Our findings suggest areas for further research on the ethics and fairness of speaker recognition technology.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. TEDI: Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators to Analyze and Compare Dataset Documentation

    cs.CY 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new 143-indicator rubric applied to 114 human-voice datasets shows that documentation of consent, privacy, and harmful content is rare, and that scraping yields scale at the cost of documented ethical practices.

Pith tools