Asosiy kontentga oʻtish
proceeding

AI-Powered Speech Fluency Assessment in Real-Time Language Learning Applications

Azizov Azizbek SabitkhanovichTuran International UniversityI. ManimozhiComputer Science and Engineering, East Point College of Engineering and Technology, Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU)Daisy Irani PatnaikSchool of Liberal Studies, KIIT (deemed to be a university)Ramazon XurramovTermez University of Economics and ServiceKhamidkhonov Qobilkhon Shukhrat UgliTuran International UniversityLalit SachdevaKalinga University
2026en
Ochiq kirishOltin

Litsenziya: cc-by

ABI

Annotatsiya

Automated speech fluency assessment enables language-learning applications to deliver immediate, scalable feedback that human tutors cannot match in volume-but only if the automated scores align closely enough with trained human raters to be trusted, arrive quickly enough not to disrupt conversational pacing, and diagnose the specific fluency dimensions a learner needs to address rather than returning a single opaque composite score. This paper fine-tunes Wav2Vec2, Facebook's self-supervised speech representation model, on a multi-dimensional fluency annotation task covering four dimensions (pronunciation accuracy, speaking rate, pause ratio, and prosody) across 691,200 scored utterances from 2,400 English language learners spanning three CEFR bands (A1-A2: 720 learners, 30.0%; B1-B2: 1,080, 45.0%; C1-C2: 600, 25.0%) and 28,800 monitored sessions. Against held-out human-rater scores, Wav2Vec2 achieves Pearson r = 0.864 and RMSE = 7.4 (0-100 scale), outperforming a rule-based threshold system$(\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{0. 5 2 4}; +\mathbf{6 4. 9 {\%}})$, an SVM on acoustic features$(\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{0. 6 8 4}$; +26.3%), and an LSTM sequence model$(\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{0. 7 6 4}$; +13.1%), while meeting the 300 ms real-time latency target at 184 ms mean inference time. Sub-dimension correlation is strongest for speaking rate$(\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{0. 9 2 4})$and weakest for prosody$(\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{0. 7 6 4})$, revealing where the model still falls short of human-level judgement. Deployed in a live language-learning application, learners receiving automated fluency feedback showed a 41.3% increase in voluntary practice-session engagement and a 58.3% increase in mean weekly practice time relative to a matched control group. L1 interference, accent-variant generalisation, low-bandwidth audio degradation, and a documented score-inflation vulnerability via deliberate speaking-rate manipulation each constrain the model's reliable scope, with concrete mitigations described for each.

Hali tarjima qilinmagan

Identifikatorlar

Iqtiboslar va manbalar