Open navigation

Working paper / 2026

MISTT

Multi-condition Impairment Speech-to-Text Bench

Abstract

Multi-condition Impairment Speech-to-Text Bench (MISTT) measures the speech-to-text models that voice agents depend on. Every model hears the same 2,999 frozen clips of voice-agent calls, doctor–patient consultations and five-language parliamentary speech, plus 400 degraded copies of 100 of them: phone lines, low-bitrate codecs, packet loss, background noise and an intelligible background talker. Streaming models are timed the way an agent waits on them, from the forced end of speech to the final transcript. Accuracy carries bootstrap confidence intervals, and the degraded copies are paired with their clean originals, so robustness is measured on the same words.

v0 · October 2026

Voice-agent requests

Pipecat STT benchmark data

pipecat-ai/stt-benchmark-data · Pipecat (pipecat-ai)

Clips in MISTT

1,000

Hours

2.66

Reference words

23,203

Independent turns

1,000

Overview

The Pipecat STT benchmark set is a collection of 1,000 English utterances published by the Pipecat project for evaluating speech-to-text services. Each clip is a single turn of the kind a user speaks to a voice assistant: a request, a question or an instruction, often cut off mid-sentence as a real turn would be.

The audio is drawn from Pipecat's smart-turn dataset, restricted to English and to recordings of real speakers (synthetic speech excluded). Reference transcripts were generated with Gemini and reviewed by humans, according to the project's documentation.

Why it was chosen

  • RepresentativenessIt is the only public corpus built from turns addressed to a voice assistant, which is the traffic a voice agent's STT model receives.
  • Breadth of requestsRequests span everyday domains: home and errands, accounts and tech support, shopping, banking, travel, food and general questions.
  • LicenceCC BY 4.0 permits publishing results and audio samples with attribution.

What it provides

In MISTT, pipecat contributes half of the English WER index and half of the paired robustness subset. Its turns are longer and less interactive than primock57's: median 29 words, about 8% phrased as questions, and roughly a third containing a number, date, place or name.

Speech
single-speaker requests to an assistant, spontaneous
Domains
home and daily life, tech support, shopping, banking, food, work, travel, media, general knowledge
Clip length
1–16 s in the source (mean 9.6 s); 2–15 s after MISTT filtering
Speakers
not stated by the source
References
Gemini-generated, human-reviewed (per the project README)
Example clip · pipecat-007dd8f10265 · 12.8 s

“Can you please tell me what the actual capital of Australia is because I always assumed it was Sydney but my friend recently insisted that it was another city entirely so now”

The same clip under four channel perturbations, with model transcripts, is in the methodology.

Known limitations

  • Speaker demographics, accents and recording conditions are not documented.
  • References are model-generated. MISTT treats a reference as suspect where at least 70% of models agree with each other and not with it; 156 such clips were kept out of the paired subset.
  • Some turns are fragments without a complete request.

Format

Distributed as Parquet on Hugging Face, one row per utterance, with 16 kHz audio.

Native format

Container
Parquet, single train split, 1,000 rows
Fields
sample_id, audio (16 kHz), duration_seconds, transcription
Audio
16-bit PCM, 16 kHz, mono

As sampled into MISTT

Selection
all 1,000 rows, single speaker, 2–15 s, ≥ 3 words, deduplicated
Processing
16 kHz mono PCM16, RMS −20 dBFS, Silero VAD speech bounds
Independence
each turn is its own resampling unit for intervals

Manifest row (clips-v0.jsonl)

{
  "clip_id": "pipecat-001122785206",
  "dataset": "pipecat",
  "language": "en",
  "duration_s": 9.089,
  "sha256": "27988540cd05bd957215c9da3c30c89622e1097d2fdfc3f798809a0c4b563179",
  "reference": "I want to start a small vegetable garden in my own backyard and need some helpful advice on which plants are best suited for my particular climate and soil type.",
  "sample_rate": 16000,
  "speech_start_ms": 992,
  "speech_end_ms": 8324,
  "license": "CC-BY-4.0"
}

Results on this dataset

81 models scored; median WER 2.40%. The ten lowest are listed. Intervals and the full ranking are on the leaderboard.

  1. 1Gemini 3.5 TranscribeGoogle · batch1.49%
  2. 2Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (minimal)Google · batch1.52%
  3. 3Gemini 3.5 Transcribe LiveGoogle · streaming1.55%
  4. 4Qwen3 ASR FlashAlibaba · batch1.71%
  5. 5Step-Audio 3 ASR MaxStepFun · batch1.71%
  6. 6Universal-3 ProAssemblyAI · batch1.73%
  7. 7Saaras v4Sarvam · streaming1.74%
  8. 8U3.6 Pro Streaming (max accuracy)AssemblyAI · streaming1.76%
  9. 9Universal-3.5 ProAssemblyAI · batch1.78%
  10. 10Qwen3 ASR Flash RealtimeAlibaba · streaming1.81%

Source and attribution

Pinned revision
ea9d721e
Licence
CC BY 4.0
Attribution
Pipecat STT benchmark data by the Pipecat project (pipecat-ai), CC BY 4.0. No formal citation is published.