ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Automatic speech recognition for Telugu: a comparative analysis of Wav2Vec 2.0 model variants and hyperparameter tuning.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems for the Telugu language can significantly enhance speech-based interaction and digital accessibility. Although Telugu is among the top languages in the Dravidian family in terms of the number of speakers, there is a notable absence of standardized, noise-robust resources for Telugu ASR development. The existing systems are not specifically designed for low-resource languages like Telugu. The datasets available for Telugu are restricted to controlled environments and do not include noise interferences. Most existing ASR models are optimized for high-resource languages such as English, leading to poor generalization when applied to Telugu. In this work, we fine-tuned three pre-trained variants of the Wav2Vec 2.0 model: XLS-R 300M, XLSR-53, and XLS-R-1B on a curated 48.4-h Telugu speech corpus compiled from Mozilla Common Voice, OpenSLR, and the Hugging Face dataset. This study utilized a comprehensive ablation study on four hyperparameters to evaluate their recognition performance using word error rate (WER) and character error rate (CER) as evaluation metrics. Among the three models, the fine-tuned XLS-R-1B performed the best, achieving a WER of 36.23% and CER of 15.44%, followed by the XLSR-53 (WER 37.78%, CER 15.81%) and XLS-R-300M (WER 37.87%, CER 15.81%). An important consideration of the research was finding the right trade-off between a model's complexity and the accuracy of its performance. The results showed that the size of the model is important, and hyperparameter selection significantly influences the development of an effective ASR model in low-resource languages such as Telugu.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.