To train or not to train adversarially: A study of bias mitigation strategies for speaker recognition
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Speaker recognition is increasingly used in several everyday applications including smart speakers, customer care centers and other speech-driven analytics. It is crucial to accurately evaluate and mitigate biases present in machine learning (ML) based speech technologies, such as speaker recognition, to ensure their inclusive adoption. ML fairness studies with respect to various demographic factors in modern speaker recognition systems are lagging compared to other human-centered applications such as face recognition. Existing studies on fairness in speaker recognition systems are largely limited to evaluating biases at specific operating points of the systems, which can lead to false expectations of fairness. Moreover, there are only a handful of bias mitigation strategies developed for speaker recognition systems. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the biases present in speaker recognition systems with respect to gender across a range of system operating points. We also propose adversarial and multi-task learning techniques to improve the fairness of these systems. We show through quantitative and qualitative evaluations that the proposed methods improve the fairness of ASV systems over baseline methods trained using data balancing techniques. We also present a fairness-utility trade-off analysis to jointly examine fairness and the overall system performance. We show that although systems trained using adversarial techniques improve fairness, they are prone to reduced utility. On the other hand, multi-task methods can improve the fairness while retaining the utility. These findings can inform the choice of bias mitigation strategies in the field of speaker recognition.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2022.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 7.
8 papers.
- 2022A Review of Speech-centric Trustworthy Machine Learning: Privacy, Safety, and Fairnesscited by 13
- 2026Shortcut Learning in Binary Classifier Black Boxes: Applications to Voice Anti-Spoofing and Biometricscited by 6
- 2026Causally Disentangled Contrastive Learning for Multilingual Speaker Embeddingscited by 2
- 2026Where Do Self-Supervised Speech Models Become Unfair?cited by 1
- 2026What You Train Is What You Get: Gender Bias, Training Composition, and Post-Hoc Mitigation in Audio Deepfake Detectioncited by 0
- 2026Simple Language Normalization Wins: Cross-Lingual Speaker Verification for the TidyVoice 2026 Challengecited by 0
- 2026The Voiceprint Fallacy: Why Voices Are Not Unique Biometric Imprintscited by 0
- 2026InterBias-SV: Compound Conditions in Speaker Verificationcited by 0
- 2026InterBias-SV: Compound Conditions in Speaker Verification29 Sep 2026
- 2026The Voiceprint Fallacy: Why Voices Are Not Unique Biometric Imprints8 Aug 2026
- 2026Simple Language Normalization Wins: Cross-Lingual Speaker Verification for the TidyVoice 2026 Challenge24 Jul 2026
- 2026What You Train Is What You Get: Gender Bias, Training Composition, and Post-Hoc Mitigation in Audio Deepfake Detection10 Jul 2026
- 2026Where Do Self-Supervised Speech Models Become Unfair?20 Apr 2026
- 2026Causally Disentangled Contrastive Learning for Multilingual Speaker Embeddings1 Feb 2026
- 2026Shortcut Learning in Binary Classifier Black Boxes: Applications to Voice Anti-Spoofing and Biometrics25 Jan 2026
- 2022A Review of Speech-centric Trustworthy Machine Learning: Privacy, Safety, and Fairness18 Dec 2022