Now booking: Pakistan Regional Voice Evaluation pilots for Q1 2027→
Home / Voice AI evaluation
Service · Voice AI evaluation

Know where your voice model fails.

Independent, native-speaker evaluation of speech recognition, text-to-speech and voice agents on Saraiki, Pakistani Punjabi and Urdu speech your model has never heard.

What you receive
  • Private held-out test set
  • Verified reference transcripts
  • Error report grouped by cause
  • Raw files and metadata
  • Re-test on each model release
Use cases

Built for the teams shipping voice products

Each engagement is scoped to the model you actually deploy, through your API or your own output files.

01

Speech recognition (ASR)

Measure word and character errors on regional accents, dialect vocabulary and noisy real-world audio.

  • WER and CER per subgroup
  • Dialect and condition splits
02

Voice agents

Test whether your agent understands what callers mean, not only what they say.

  • Intent and slot errors
  • Meaning-critical failures
03

Code-switching

Urdu–English switching inside one sentence is normal speech. We test it directly.

  • Language-switch labels
  • Loanword handling
04

Text-to-speech

Native listeners rate pronunciation, naturalness and intelligibility of generated speech.

  • Mispronunciation log
  • Listener preference tests
05

Multilingual LLMs

Native raters judge LLM answers for correctness, fluency and cultural fit in Urdu and Saraiki.

  • Rubric-based scoring
  • Disagreement tracked
06

Regression testing

Run the same private test set on every new model version to catch silent regressions.

  • Monthly or per release
  • Version-to-version diff
Error taxonomy

We report errors by cause, not one average

Each failed utterance is labelled with the reason it failed, so your team can prioritise fixes.

Error classWhat it meansExample (illustrative)
Dialect substitutionA regional word is replaced by the nearest Urdu or Hindi wordSaraiki wanjna → jana
Code-switch failureEnglish words inside Urdu speech are misspelt or droppedreschedule → re shedule
Noise-induced errorBackground sound causes missing or invented wordsmarket noise → [inaudible]
SegmentationWord boundaries split or merged incorrectlykaranga → kar anga
Meaning-criticalTranscript looks close but the intent changeskal (tomorrow) ↔ aj (today)
Omission / insertionWords are missing or addeddropped negation nahin
Workflow

How an evaluation runs

STEP 1Test design

We agree languages, speaker mix, recording conditions and metrics with you.

STEP 2Reference labelling

Consented speech is recorded and transcribed by native speakers, then double-checked.

STEP 3Model output

We run your API, or you send outputs. Your model stays yours.

STEP 4Independent review

Errors are classified, scored and explained in a written report.

Report preview

What a report looks like

Every report includes methodology, limitations and examples, so results can be reproduced.

REPORT Phonivra evaluation · illustrative format scope 100 utterances · Saraiki 40 · Pakistani Punjabi 30 · Urdu+EN 30 metrics WER, CER, meaning-critical error rate, per-subgroup breakdown splits dialect · recording condition · speaker age band · code-switch output report.pdf · utterances.jsonl · errors.csv · metadata.csv · licence.txt # sample row {"id":"SKR-0041","ref":"kal sawere mandi wanj ke...","hyp":"kal savera mandi wanch ke...", "errors":[{"type":"dialect_substitution","ref":"wanj","hyp":"wanch"}],"meaning_kept":false}

Illustrative example of our format. Live consented samples publish at launch.

Start small

Test your model on 100 real utterances.

A fixed-scope pilot across Saraiki, Pakistani Punjabi and Urdu with a full error report. You keep the findings.