DialectSafe: Bridging the ASR Gap

David Romero, Euruviel Marquez, Leonardo Torres y Roberto Balmes

DialectSafe: A Safety Audit of Multimodal ASR in the Global South addresses the critical issue of "Digital Deafness," where state-of-the-art automatic speech recognition systems fail systematically on peripheral, hyper-rural dialects underrepresented in standard metropolitan benchmarks. Focusing on rural Yucatecan Spanish—a variety heavily shaped by Mayan language contact—this project implements a rigorous, 100% reproducible evaluation pipeline running under a deterministic environment with a fixed random seed of 42 and zero temperature parameters. By auditing 15 field audio samples across two paradigms, the benchmark directly compares the transcription outputs of OpenAI's Whisper, a model unexposed to local indigenous speech dynamics, against Google’s advanced multimodal Gemini 2.5 Flash via OpenRouter. Rather than relying on aggregate metrics alone, the framework leverages advanced alignment processing to conduct a granular qualitative analysis, categorizing speech recognition failures into deletions, substitutions, and insertions. The evaluation exposes a dangerous upstream safety failure dubbed the "Domino Effect," wherein highly corrupted ASR text propagates into downstream Large Language Models, forcing standard AI assistants to generate confident, speculative, or completely irrelevant advice for requests the user never actually articulated. Ultimately, DialectSafe establishes a formal pre-deployment safety audit standard for Global South voice technologies, demonstrating that AI alignment and safety boundaries are ineffective if the system remains structurally incapable of hearing and respecting the cultural and linguistic reality of marginalized communities.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Not strictly AI SafetyNot strictly AI Safety

The safety framing is real but underdeveloped. One paragraph mapping the failure modes to concrete harm scenarios, e.g., a rural speaker denied access to a public service because of a silent transcription error. This would make the connection explicit and strengthen the submission significantly.

Undersold contribution

The paper's most valuable contribution is the field data collection itself: real audio from rural Yucatecan and Mayan-contact speakers with human ground truth. This is rare and hard to do, and it is barely mentioned. It should be front and center in the abstract and conclusion.

Corpus size

N=15 is acknowledged as a limitation. Expanding it is the single most impactful next step, and the team already has the methodology and community access to do it.

The issue is very interesting and of unquestionable social relevance. The approach taken is appropriate. The authors state that they are dealing with Yucatec Maya and rural Spanish-Maya. However, their corpus of analysis indicates that it is Wixárika, which is known as Huichol. The Wixárika are not from Yucatán, do not speak Maya, and are from the Sierra de Nayarit and Jalisco (the authors state: ‘Oral traditions and indigenous legends: Yoremes fire myth, Wixárika dawn cosmogony’). Mayan and Wixárika are not even linguistically related. Furthermore, with regard to the oral tradition concerning the appearance of the patron saint Akatekos, it appears that this originates not from Yucatán, but from Guatemala. This seriously undermines the credibility of the work because it calls into question the methodological foundation of the project. In other words, the data the study claims to have used is not what was actually used: a corpus of Maya conversation, specifically rural Spanish-Maya, but containing conversations in other languages: Wixárika and Akatekos. Perhaps the problem was an oversight; it is an unfortunate situation because I believe it could have been an excellent contribution.

- The problem this paper studies is very important.

- The introduction is missing some context. For example, how much these systems are actually being used in these contexts.

- It's not clear how or when the dataset was built. Was it generated during the hackathon? Who participated in collecting the audio? If people outside the team were involved, was there any compensation? How many people? Is there diversity in terms of gender, region, etc.?

- The explanation is quite fragmented. Code is described in the text (which shouldn't be done in an academic paper). It's recommended to present the methodology without describing the code itself. Instead of explaining the code, it would help to give more information about the metrics: what they mean, how they're calculated, and how they should be interpreted.

DialectSafe documents a concrete and urgent exclusion problem. Neither evaluated model is fit for deployment in rural communities (in this case, Yucatán), and the distinction between digital deafness (Whisper's silent omissions) and insertion cascades (Gemini's massive hallucinations) is a useful diagnostic framework for voice pipeline designers.

The Appendix C with real hallucination examples is one of the most effective elements for communicating risk to non-technical audiences. To strengthen the work, the most important next steps are expanding the corpus to at least 50 audio samples to enable statistical significance testing, implementing a metric that does not unfairly penalize Maya-language output when references are in Spanish, and adding the language-forced Whisper baseline (language='es') that the team identifies as future work. The proposed WER < 0.20 deployment threshold is a concrete policy contribution worth developing further.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) DialectSafe: Bridging the ASR Gap

},

author={

David Romero, Euruviel Marquez, Leonardo Torres y Roberto Balmes

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.