Dataset specification · Evaluation scale
100 hours of Hindi Telephony Speech
An evaluation scale build of 100 hours of Hindi telephony speech. Building a benchmark or evaluation set that is large enough to trust, or fine-tuning a narrow domain. Speech captured over a real telephony path — a genuine call through the network, not studio audio downsampled afterwards to imitate one.

- Volume
- 100 hours
- Scale
- Evaluation scale
- Per speaker
- 10–20 minutes of accepted audio per speaker
- Accepted yield
- 50–60% of recorded time is accepted
How Hindi telephony speech is captured
Speech captured over a real telephony path — a genuine call through the network, not studio audio downsampled afterwards to imitate one.
Scenario-driven calls between a caller and an agent or IVR flow, each leg recorded separately, across a deliberate spread of handsets and network conditions.
Yield at this style: 50–60% of recorded time is accepted. Dropped calls, network artefacts beyond tolerance and unusable legs are discarded. Real network conditions are the point of the style and also its main cost.
The specification
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Language | Hindi (hi-IN, Devanagari) |
| Volume | 100 hours |
| Equivalent | 200 speakers at 30 minutes each, or 100 speakers at one hour each |
| Speech type | Telephony Speech |
| Per speaker | 10–20 minutes of accepted audio per speaker |
| Sample rate | 8 kHz narrowband, matching what a deployed contact-centre model actually receives |
| Codec | G.711 and AMR-NB captured explicitly, with the codec recorded per call in the manifest |
| Legs | Caller and agent recorded on separate legs, never as a mixed call recording |
| Network conditions | Handset type, network carrier and packet-loss events logged per call |
| Dialects | Khari Boli, Awadhi, Braj, Bhojpuri-influenced Hindi |
| Transcription | Verbatim, native-speaker, second-pass reviewed |

Designing the call flows for Hindi
- Call scenarios drawn from real contact-centre intents: balance enquiry, complaint, booking change, escalation
- IVR flows scripted with deliberate mis-entry and barge-in paths, since those are where deployed systems fail
- Handset spread specified up front — low-end Android, feature phone, landline — because handset variance is a real acoustic axis
- Background conditions varied on purpose: street, vehicle, indoor, since real callers are rarely in quiet rooms
- Built against Hindi specifically: Four-way stop contrast (voiced/voiceless x aspirated/unaspirated) that collapses in models trained on English-first acoustic units
- Code-mixing handled explicitly rather than edited out — Urban Hindi speech is Hinglish in practice. Expect 15-40% English tokens in spontaneous speech: numbers, brands, technology terms, and whole clause switches. Any Hindi corpus that excludes English tokens will not match production traffic.
Running an evaluation scale Hindi build
Four to six weeks. Two cities running in parallel means recruitment and recording overlap rather than queue behind each other.
Three batches at roughly two-week intervals, each one a self-contained, speaker-disjoint slice you can evaluate independently.
Largest recruitment pool in the network. A 1,000-speaker Hindi cohort with balanced gender and 18-45 age bands is typically fielded across four cities to avoid a single-city accent bias.
| Parameter | At this volume |
|---|---|
| Cities | Two, chosen for dialect contrast — Delhi, Lucknow |
| Studios | Two rooms running in parallel |
| Recruiters | Two coordinators |
| Speakers | ~200–240 |
| Sessions per day | 12–16 across both cities |
| Team | 2 coordinators, 4 engineers, 6 transcribers, 1 QA lead |
Cohort design
At 100 hours the cohort is deliberately simplified: two or three dialect groups rather than the full spread, with quotas enforced in aggregate. A build this size cannot support per-cell targets and should not claim to.
Recruitment must be stratified by handset and carrier as well as by dialect, which adds a screening axis the other styles do not have.
| Dimension | Typical split | Why it matters for Hindi |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | 50 / 50 | Pitch range differences change acoustic model behaviour; unbalanced cohorts bias recognition |
| Age | 18-25: 30%, 26-40: 40%, 41-60: 30% | Older speakers retain conservative Hindi forms that younger urban speakers have lost |
| Region | Uttar Pradesh / Bihar / Madhya Pradesh and others | Dialect spread across 7 recognised varieties |
| Education | Mixed, including below-graduate | Prompt-reading fluency correlates with education and skews prosody |
| Condition | Studio / quiet room / field | Match the noise profile of your deployment |
Hindi-specific considerations
- Four-way stop contrast (voiced/voiceless x aspirated/unaspirated) that collapses in models trained on English-first acoustic units
- Urban Hindi speech is Hinglish in practice. Expect 15-40% English tokens in spontaneous speech: numbers, brands, technology terms, and whole clause switches. Any Hindi corpus that excludes English tokens will not match production traffic.
- Public Hindi corpora skew heavily towards read newspaper text from educated urban speakers in Delhi and NCR. Rural Bihar and eastern UP speech, elderly speakers, and low-literacy speakers reading prompts aloud are largely absent.
Quality gates for telephony speech
- Codec and sample rate verified per file, rejecting any studio audio that has been downsampled to fake a telephony path
- Echo and double-talk checked on both legs
- DTMF events verified against the call log
- Level normalisation applied per leg, since handset output levels vary far more than studio microphones do
- Inconsistent Devanagari vs romanised spelling for the same English loan word
- Nukta characters (क़ ख़ ग़ ज़ फ़) applied inconsistently by transcribers
100% technical QA, 25% content QA, escalating to full review on any batch that fails the agreed error threshold.
What goes wrong on telephony speech sessions
- Studio audio downsampled to 8 kHz and passed off as telephony, which has none of the codec or packet-loss characteristics that matter
- Echo and double-talk that make the agent leg unusable
- Carrier and handset monoculture, producing a corpus that only represents one acoustic path
- Over-clean recordings from participants who move somewhere quiet to take the call, defeating the purpose
Risks at evaluation scale in Hindi
Cost at this band is driven by: Dialect spread is the main driver at this band — two contrasting cities cost more than two convenient ones; Turnaround compression, if you need it inside four weeks.
- Two-city cohorts can hide a dialect gap that only appears when the model meets a third region
- Transcription consistency between two city teams needs an explicit convention document or the batches will not match
- Hindi carries 7 recognised varieties across Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, so the quota matrix is wider than the headline volume suggests
- Public Hindi corpora skew heavily towards read newspaper text from educated urban speakers in Delhi and NCR. Rural Bihar and eastern UP speech, elderly speakers, and low-literacy speakers reading prompts aloud are largely absent.
Deliverables
- WAV audio to your naming convention, with the per-file manifest
- Verbatim Devanagari transcripts with utterance-level timestamps
- Call metadata: duration, codec, handset class, carrier, packet-loss events
- Intent label per call and per turn
- DTMF and hold, transfer and barge-in events
- Agent and caller leg identifiers
- Per-speaker metadata: age band, gender, region, dialect, education band
- Consent records mapped to speaker IDs
- QA report with pass rates, rejection reasons and agreement statistics
- Speaker-disjoint train / dev / test splits on request
What this trains, and what it does not
- Contact-centre and IVR ASR
- Voice bots operating over the phone network
- Intent classification on narrowband audio
- Robustness to codec and packet loss
Narrowband telephony audio is the wrong input for TTS or any wideband model — the frequency content simply is not there. Use it for models that will be deployed on a phone line and nothing else.
Frequently asked
Is 100 hours of Hindi enough?
A solid evaluation set, and enough to fine-tune an existing multilingual model on a narrow domain. Still short of what a general production model needs.
Why telephony speech rather than another speech type?
Contact-centre and IVR ASR, Voice bots operating over the phone network, Intent classification on narrowband audio are what this style is the right input for. Narrowband telephony audio is the wrong input for TTS or any wideband model — the frequency content simply is not there. Use it for models that will be deployed on a phone line and nothing else.
How long does an evaluation scale Hindi build take?
Four to six weeks. Two cities running in parallel means recruitment and recording overlap rather than queue behind each other. Three batches at roughly two-week intervals, each one a self-contained, speaker-disjoint slice you can evaluate independently.
What does 100 hours of Hindi telephony speech cost?
Quoted per delivered hour against this specification. At this band the drivers are dialect spread is the main driver at this band — two contrasting cities cost more than two convenient ones and turnaround compression, if you need it inside four weeks. Send the spec and you get one fixed figure.
How much QA is applied at this volume?
100% technical QA, 25% content QA, escalating to full review on any batch that fails the agreed error threshold.
Quote this Hindi dataset
100 hours, telephony speech, Hindi — evaluation scale. Adjust anything and send it.