mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Pruning for Efficiency, Paying in Fairness: Demographic Disparities in Pruned Speech-LLMs

arXiv 2609.38106 ↗First posted 29 Sep 2026cs.SD cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Speech-LLMs are expensive to run, making compression important for real-world deployment. However, compressed models are usually selected using aggregate word error rate (WER), which can hide how pruning affects different demographic groups. In this work, we systematically study the effect of audio encoder pruning on SLAM-ASR for different demographic groups. Using the Fair-Speech and Common Voice datasets, we found that the pruning does not affect all demographic groups equally; the gap between best- and worst-performing groups increases in fold. These disparities appear across all three encoder scales, but only the largest model initially hides them behind aggregate WER. LoRA adaptation improves WER for every group, but benefits groups already performing well more strongly and widens for certain groups. On Common Voice English, Danish, and Dutch, accent gaps persist but do not clearly widen, showing that the fairness effects of pruning vary across datasets and must be measured directly. Our findings suggest that for pruned models, deployment decisions should include per-group WER, with the worst-performing group's error rate as an explicit criterion.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.

Builds on

18 of 35 references.

References · 18

  1. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  2. 2022Robust Speech Recognition via Large-Scale Weak Supervisioncited by 4,057
  3. 2019Common Voice: A Massively-Multilingual Speech Corpuscited by 1,384
  4. 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,247
  5. 2020Characterising Bias in Compressed Modelscited by 167
  6. 2024Decoding Compressed Trust: Scrutinizing the Trustworthiness of Efficient LLMs Under Compressioncited by 57
  7. 2021Quantifying Bias in Automatic Speech Recognitioncited by 50
  8. 2022Pruning has a disparate impact on model accuracycited by 44
  9. 2023The Edinburgh International Accents of English Corpus: Towards the Democratization of English ASRcited by 36
  10. 2024Beyond Perplexity: Multi-dimensional Safety Evaluation of LLM Compressioncited by 33
  11. 2023Kid-Whisper: Towards Bridging the Performance Gap in Automatic Speech Recognition for Children VS. Adultscited by 27
  12. 2024On the social bias of speech self-supervised modelscited by 16
6 more
  1. 2024On Fairness of Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Modelscited by 9
  2. 2024BA-LoRA: Bias-Alleviating Low-Rank Adaptation to Mitigate Catastrophic Inheritance in Large Language Modelscited by 7
  3. 2025Improving the Inclusivity of Dutch Speech Recognition by Fine-tuning Whisper on the JASMIN-CGN Corpuscited by 5
  4. 2026Do LLM Decoders Listen Fairly? Benchmarking How Language Model Priors Shape Bias in Speech Recognitioncited by 4
  5. 2026Language Family Matters: Evaluating LLM-Based ASR Across Linguistic Boundariescited by 2
  6. 2026On the Role of Encoder Depth: Pruning Whisper and LoRA Fine-Tuning in SLAM-ASRcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.