aidataservices.inAI data collection · India

Speaker Diarisation · ગુજરાતી

Gujarati Data for Speaker Diarisation

Determining who spoke when in multi-party Indian-language audio, including overlapped speech. In Gujarati, the binding constraint is usually dialect coverage and code-mixing, not raw hours.

Request a dataset quoteReply within one working day
Annotator labelling audio segments and speaker turns — Gujarati Data for Speaker Diarisation
Language
Gujarati
Primary metric
Diarisation error rate
Typical volume
250-1,000 hours
01

Data profile required

  • Per-speaker isolated channels with a mixed reference
  • Genuine overlap preserved
  • Turn-level ground truth
Speaker Diarisation · GujaratiData profile that moves itWhat it is scored onPer-speaker isolated channels with a mi…Genuine overlap preservedTurn-level ground truthDiarisation error rateOverlap detection recallSpeaker-count accuracyThe corpus is specified backwards from the right-hand column.
02

What Gujarati adds to the requirement

  • Murmured (breathy-voiced) vowels are phonemic in Gujarati and are absent from most shared Indic acoustic models
  • Surti speech has distinctive intonation and vowel quality that mismatches Ahmedabad-trained models
  • Dialects to cover: Standard (Amdavadi), Surti, Kathiyawadi, Kachchhi-influenced
  • Business and trade vocabulary is heavily English; Gujarati diaspora speech adds further English structure. Specify whether diaspora speakers are in or out of scope.
Annotators writing prompts and responses for LLM training data — supporting gujarati data for speaker diarisation
Annotators writing prompts and responses for LLM training data
03

Metrics to track

  • Diarisation error rate
  • Overlap detection recall
  • Speaker-count accuracy
04

Failure modes

  • Overlap edited out during recording
  • Single-channel-only capture leaving no reliable ground truth

For Gujarati specifically: Very little spontaneous Gujarati audio exists publicly; nearly all of it is Ahmedabad read speech.

05

Recommended cohort

Surat and Rajkot recruitment is essential for dialect coverage; Ahmedabad-only cohorts sound uniform.

DimensionTypical splitWhy it matters for Gujarati
Gender50 / 50Pitch range differences change acoustic model behaviour; unbalanced cohorts bias recognition
Age18-25: 30%, 26-40: 40%, 41-60: 30%Older speakers retain conservative Gujarati forms that younger urban speakers have lost
RegionGujarat / Daman & Diu / Dadra & Nagar Haveli and othersDialect spread across 5 recognised varieties
EducationMixed, including below-graduatePrompt-reading fluency correlates with education and skews prosody
ConditionStudio / quiet room / fieldMatch the noise profile of your deployment
06

Suggested programme shape

Start with an evaluation set of 100 speakers spread across every Gujarati dialect in scope, collected before training data. Then field 250-1,000 hours of training data from disjoint speakers.

This ordering is what makes the improvement measurable rather than assumed.

Frequently asked

Is there usable public Gujarati data for speaker diarisation?

Very little spontaneous Gujarati audio exists publicly; nearly all of it is Ahmedabad read speech.

How many Gujarati speakers do we need?

500-1,500 speakers for a training corpus, plus a disjoint evaluation cohort covering each dialect. Speaker count matters more than hours for generalisation.

Can you run this across multiple languages at once?

Yes. Multi-language programmes run to one master specification so per-language results stay comparable.

Scope Gujarati data for speaker diarisation

Send the target metric and the languages in scope.

Request a dataset quote