Evaluates end-to-end and cascaded named entity recognition from Arabic speech. It probes a model's ability to jointly transcribe spoken Arabic and predict fine-grained entity types (21 categories) using BIO-style tagging, as well as extract entity spans and values. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CV-18 NER, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports CoER.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Cv 18 Ner Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-cv-18-ner-eval)
---
name: cv-18-ner-eval
description: Evaluates end-to-end and cascaded named entity recognition from Arabic speech. It probes a model's ability to jointly transcribe spoken Arabic and predict fine-grained entity types (21 categories) using BIO-style tagging, as well as extract entity spans and values. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CV-18 NER, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports CoER.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2604.02209
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# cv-18-ner-eval
> CV-18 NER: Augmented Common Voice for Named Entity Recognition from Arabic Speech — Saidi et al. (2026) (arXiv:2604.02209, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates end-to-end and cascaded named entity recognition from Arabic speech. It probes a model's ability to jointly transcribe spoken Arabic and predict fine-grained entity types (21 categories) using BIO-style tagging, as well as extract entity spans and values.
## Datasets
- **CV-18 NER** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `CoER` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Concept Error Rate. Computed as (S+D+I)/N, where S, D, I are substitutions, deletions, and insertions, and N is the number of reference entity labels. Evaluates correctness of entity labels (e.g., B-PERS, I-ORG) independently of lexical content.
- `CVER` — range: percent
- Concept-Value Error Rate. Computed as (S+D+I)/N over tag-value pairs. Evaluates both entity type and entity span by comparing extracted pairs from predicted and reference transcripts.
- `WER` — range: percent
- Word Error Rate. Computed as (S+D+I)/N over words, after removing special entity tokens from model outputs.
- `Micro-averaged F1-score` — range: percent
- Standard micro-averaged F1 computed over token-level BIO predictions for text-based NER systems.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Audio signals resampled to 16 kHz for speech models; normalized text transcriptions (punctuation/diacritics removed, Eastern numerals transliterated) for text-based NER models.
**Output**: For speech models: concatenated transcription with entity tags as single atomic special tokens (e.g., B-PERS, I-ORG). For text models: BIO-style token-level labels aligned with input sentences.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_error_rate(pred_tokens, ref_tokens):
S, D, I = edit_distance_operations(pred_tokens, ref_tokens)
N = len(ref_tokens)
return (S + D + I) / N
def compute_coer(pred_tags, ref_tags):
return compute_error_rate(pred_tags, ref_tags)
def compute_cver(pred_pairs, ref_pairs):
return compute_error_rate(pred_pairs, ref_pairs)
# WER is computed on word tokens after stripping entity tags.
# F1 is computed via standard micro-averaging over token labels.
```
## Common pitfalls
- Transcription errors in ASR directly degrade downstream NER performance, but lower WER does not guarantee better CoER/CVER due to differences in error types.
- Entity tags are treated as single atomic tokens in the vocabulary; they must be removed before computing WER to avoid skewing results.
- Performance drops sharply for low-frequency entity types (e.g., PRODUCT, LAW) compared to high-frequency ones (e.g., LANGUAGE, GPE).
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Named entity recognition performance is evaluated using Concept Error Rate (CoER) and Concept-Value Error Rate (CVER), which are adapted from spoken language understanding evaluation. WER, CoER, and CVER follow the standard error-rate formulation: Error Rate = (S+D+I)/N, where S, D, and I denote substitutions, deletions, and insertions, and N is the number of reference units. CoER evaluates the correctness of entity labels only (e.g., B-PERS, I-ORG), independently of the lexical content. CVER evaluates both entity type and entity span by comparing tag–value pairs extracted from the annotated transcripts.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{saidi2026cv18ner,
title={CV-18 NER: Augmented Common Voice for Named Entity Recognition from Arabic Speech},
author={Saidi et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2604.02209}
}
```
- arXiv: 2604.02209