Comparison of a bigram PLSA and a novel context-based PLSA language model for speech recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a novel context-based probabilistic latent semantic analysis (PLSA) language model for speech recognition. In this model, the topic is conditioned on the immediate history context and the document in the original PLSA model. This allows computing all the possible bigram probabilities of the seen history context using the model. It properly computes the topic probability of an unseen document for each history context present in the document. We compare our approach with a recently proposed unsmoothed bigram PLSA model where only the seen bigram probabilities are calculated, which causes computing the incorrect topic probability for the present history context of the unseen document. The proposed model requires a significantly less amount of computation time and memory space requirements than the unsmoothed bigram PLSA model. We carried out experiments on a continuous speech recognition (CSR) task using theWall Street Journal (WSJ) corpus. The proposed approach shows significant reduction in both perplexity and word error rate (WER) measurements over the other approach.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".