evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

USC — ISSAI's Open Uzbek Speech Corpus (105 Hours, 958 Speakers) for Voice Technology in Uzbek

Uzbekistan · Tashkent · See the Uzbekistan profile · See the Tashkent profile

Top 82% 52/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

An open corpus of 105 hours of read Uzbek speech from 958 speakers, checked by native speakers, with baseline recognisers at 17.4–18.1% word error rate. Evidence is technical only; no user outcomes yet.

USC — ISSAI's Open Uzbek Speech Corpus (105 Hours, 958 Speakers) for Voice Technology in Uzbek

Details

Promoter
ISSAI, Nazarbayev University (with Uzbek collaborators)
Period
2021
Keywords
speech recognition, open data, language inclusion, voice interfaces

Description

Uzbek, spoken by tens of millions of people, had almost no open speech data, which left voice interfaces, captioning and screen-reader-style tools out of reach for many users. In 2021 a team from ISSAI (Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan) and Uzbek collaborators released USC, an open-source corpus of 105 hours of transcribed read speech from 958 speakers, manually checked by native speakers.
The authors trained DNN-HMM and end-to-end recognisers on it and reported word error rates of 18.1% on the validation set and 17.4% on the test set. They describe these results as preliminary. The paper was accepted at SPECOM 2021, and the dataset, pre-trained models and training recipes are shared on GitHub.
Evidence is limited to technical benchmarks: no user study, deployment or adoption data is published, and the dataset licence is not stated on the project pages. Its value for digital inclusion is as enabling infrastructure for Uzbek-language voice tools, not as a measured service outcome.

Read the full analysis: https://issai.nu.edu.kz/2021/09/29/usc-an-open-source-uzbek-speech-corpus-and-initial-speech-recognition-experiments/

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful