Kelechi Ezema

dblp:402/9215 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0005-3701-2210ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Speech recognition and synthesis · 50% Trustworthy machine learning · 50%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Interaction techniques and input · 77% Learning and educational technologies · 23%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Speech recognition and synthesis
automatic speech recognition
0.912025
"It feels like we're not meeting the criteria": Examining and Mitigating the Cascading Effects of Bias in Automatic Speech Recognition in Spoken Language Interfaces · CHI 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness
demographic bias
0.912025
"It feels like we're not meeting the criteria": Examining and Mitigating the Cascading Effects of Bias in Automatic Speech Recognition in Spoken Language Interfaces · CHI 2025
Interaction techniques and input
voice interaction
0.912025
"It feels like we're not meeting the criteria": Examining and Mitigating the Cascading Effects of Bias in Automatic Speech Recognition in Spoken Language Interfaces · CHI 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

fine-tuning · 1.7bias mitigation · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 "It feels like we're not meeting the criteria": Examining and Mitigating the Cascading Effects of Bias in Automatic Speech Recognition in Spoken Language Interfaces
abstract
Researchers have demonstrated that Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems perform differently across demographic groups (i.e. show bias), yet their downstream impact on spoken language interfaces remains unexplored. We examined this question in the context of a real-world AI-powered interface that provides tutors with feedback on the quality of their discourse. We found that the Whisper ASR had lower accuracy for Black vs. white tutors, likely due to differences in acoustic patterns of speech. The downstream automated discourse classifiers of tutor talk were correspondingly less accurate for Black tutors when presented with ASR input. As a result, although Black tutors demonstrated higher-quality discourse on human transcripts, this trend was not evident on ASR transcripts. We experimented with methods to reduce ASR bias, finding that fine-tuning the ASR on Black speech reduced, but did not eliminate, ASR bias and its downstream effects. We discuss implications for AI-based spoken language interfaces aimed at providing unbiased assessments to improve performance outcomes.
Kelechi Ezema, Chelsea Chandler, Rosy Southwell, Niranjan Cholendiran, Sidney K. D'Mello
CHI1