Bibliographic record
Abstract
Webcasts are an emerging technology enabled by the expanding availability and capacity of the World Wide Web. This has led to an increase in the number of lectures and academic presentations being broadcast over the Internet. Ideally, repositories of such webcasts would be used in the same manner as libraries: users could search for, retrieve, or browse through textual information. However, one major obstacle prevents webcast archives from becoming the digital equivalent of traditional libraries: information is mainly transmitted and stored in spoken form. Despite voice being currently present in all webcasts, users do not benefit from it beyond simple playback. My goal has been to exploit this information-rich resource and improve webcast users' experience in browsing and searching for specific information. I achieve this by combining research in Human-Computer Interaction and Automatic Speech Recognition that would ultimately see text transcripts of lectures being integrated into webcast archives.\n\nIn this dissertation, I show that the usefulness of automatically-generated transcripts of webcast lectures can be improved by speech recognition techniques specifically addressed at increasing the accuracy of webcast transcriptions, and the development of an interactive collaborative interface that facilitates users' contributions to machine-generated transcripts. I first investigate the user needs for transcription accuracy in webcast archives and show that users' performance and transcript quality perception is affected by the Word Error Rate (WER). A WER equal to or less than 25% is acceptable for use in webcast archives. As current Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems can only deliver, in realistic lecture conditions, WERs of around 45-50%, I propose and evaluate a webcast system extension that engages users to collaborate in a wiki manner on editing imperfect ASR transcripts.\n\nMy research on ASR focuses on reducing the WER for lectures by making use of available external knowledge sources, such as documents on the World Wide Web and lecture slides, to better model the conversational and the topic-specific styles of lectures. I show that this approach results in relative WER reductions of 11%. Further ASR improvements are proposed that combine the research on language modelling with aspects of collaborative transcript editing. Extracting information about the most frequent ASR errors from user-edited partial transcripts, and attempting to correct such errors when they occur in the remaining transcripts, can lead to an additional 10 to 18% relative reduction in lecture WER.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".