Speaker Diarisation · ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Punjabi Data for Speaker Diarisation
Determining who spoke when in multi-party Indian-language audio, including overlapped speech. In Punjabi, the binding constraint is usually dialect coverage and code-mixing, not raw hours.
- Language
- Punjabi
- Primary metric
- Diarisation error rate
- Typical volume
- 100-500 hours
Data profile required
- Per-speaker isolated channels with a mixed reference
- Genuine overlap preserved
- Turn-level ground truth
What Punjabi adds to the requirement
- Punjabi is tonal: high, low and level tones distinguish words, and tone is not marked in Gurmukhi orthography
- Historical voiced aspirates surface as tone rather than aspiration, which confounds shared Indic phone sets
- Dialects to cover: Majhi (standard), Malwai, Doabi, Puadhi
- Punjabi speech mixes Hindi and English freely, with strong diaspora influence in urban registers.
Metrics to track
- Diarisation error rate
- Overlap detection recall
- Speaker-count accuracy
Failure modes
- Overlap edited out during recording
- Single-channel-only capture leaving no reliable ground truth
For Punjabi specifically: Tonal variation is essentially unmodelled in public Punjabi data, and Malwai/Doabi rural speech is scarce.
Recommended cohort
Cover all three historic regions (Majha, Malwa, Doaba); tone realisation differs measurably between them.
| Dimension | Typical split | Why it matters for Punjabi |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Punjabi forms that younger urban speakers have lost |
| Region | Punjab / Haryana / Delhi and others | Dialect spread across 5 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 |
Suggested programme shape
Start with an evaluation set of 100 speakers spread across every Punjabi dialect in scope, collected before training data. Then field 100-500 hours of training data from disjoint speakers.
This ordering is what makes the improvement measurable rather than assumed.
Frequently asked
Is there usable public Punjabi data for speaker diarisation?
Tonal variation is essentially unmodelled in public Punjabi data, and Malwai/Doabi rural speech is scarce.
How many Punjabi speakers do we need?
300-800 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 Punjabi data for speaker diarisation
Send the target metric and the languages in scope.