> For example, speech recognition AI is supposedly within fraction of a percent from "average human level", and yet auto-generated captions are awful. They have

> For example, speech recognition AI is supposedly within fraction of a percent from "average human level", and yet auto-generated captions are awful. They have no punctuation, they don't distinguish between different speakers, they aren't visually grouped, and fail miserably dealing with slang. So turns out researchers are measuring only one aspect of the problem their algorithm is good at and ignoring the rest. YouTube captioning != SOTA, any more than Google Translate for years and years represented anything close to the NMT SOTA.