Generative vs. Encoder Large Language Models for ASR Evaluation: A Comparative Study
cs.CL
Submitted: 2026-08-26
Updated: 2026-08-26
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) is typically evaluated using Word Error Rate (WER), which poorly reflects semantic similarity.
Terminology
Abstract
Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) is typically evaluated using Word Error Rate (WER), which poorly reflects semantic similarity. While embedding-based metrics correlate better with human judgments, the respective roles of encoder and decoder-based Large Language Models (LLMs) remain underexplored. This paper presents a comparative study of both families for ASR evaluation. We analyze BERTScore and SemDist across different LLMs, layers, and pooling strategies, showing that both metrics can achieve strong correlation with human judgments when properly configured. For decoder models, we investigate generative LLMs in two settings: pairwise hypothesis selection via prompting and direct qualitative error classification. Our results show that encoder-based metrics remain highly competitive, while generative LLMs perform strongly in hypothesis comparison and improve the interpretability of ASR evaluation.
Sources
- LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models
- Gemma: Open Models Based on Gemini Research and Technology
- Semantic-WER: A Unified Metric for the Evaluation of ASR Transcript for End Usability
Related papers
- Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving
- Ishigaki-IDS-Bench: A Benchmark for Generating Information Delivery Specification from BIM Information Requirements
- Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signals
- MedStruct-S: A Benchmark for Key Discovery, Key-Conditioned QA and Semi-Structured Extraction from OCR Clinical Reports
- The End of Transformers? On Challenging Attention and the Rise of Sub-Quadratic Architectures
- Untangling the Mechanisms of Misleading Context in Medical Question Answering