MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188372498 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2021/538

A Streaming End-to-End Framework For Spoken Language Understanding

2021· article· en· W3188372498 on OpenAlexaff
Nihal Potdar, Anderson R. Avila, Chao Xing, Dong Wang, Yiran Cao, Xiao Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceKeyword spottingEnd-to-end principleConnectionismLatency (audio)Speech recognitionProcess (computing)Spoken languageSpottingTask (project management)Language modelNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

End-to-end spoken language understanding (SLU) recently attracted increasing interest. Compared to the conventional tandem-based approach that combines speech recognition and language understanding as separate modules, the new approach extracts users' intentions directly from the speech signals, resulting in joint optimization and low latency. Such an approach, however, is typically designed to process one intent at a time, which leads users to have to take multiple rounds to fulfill their requirements while interacting with a dialogue system. In this paper, we propose a streaming end-to-end framework that can process multiple intentions in an online and incremental way. The backbone of our framework is a unidirectional RNN trained with the connectionist temporal classification (CTC) criterion. By this design, an intention can be identified when sufficient evidence has been accumulated, and multiple intentions will be identified sequentially. We evaluate our solution on the Fluent Speech Commands (FSC) dataset and the detection accuracy is about 97 % on all multi-intent settings. This result is comparable to the performance of the state-of-the-art non-streaming models, but is achieved in an online and incremental way. We also employ our model to an keyword spotting task using the Google Speech Commands dataset, and the results are also highly promising.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207