MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376869336 · doi:10.18280/isi.280220

Spontaneous Speech and Its Features Are Taken into Account When Creating Recognition Programs

2023· article· en· W4376869336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Askhat Yergaliyev, Altynbek Sharipbay, Lyailya Baibulekova

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech recognitionComputer scienceNatural language processingPsychologyLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relevance of the stated subject of this scientific research is determined by the numerous difficulties of spontaneous speech recognition due to the presence of a complex of unrelated factors, as well as the need to find the best ways to overcome them through recognition programs that are used in the development of a multilingual corpus.This research aims to identify and study the key features of spontaneous speech that should be considered when creating recognition programs.The basis of the methodological approach in this scientific study is a combination of methods combining a systematic analysis of the principles of building a multilingual corpus with an analytical study of the principles of operation of spontaneous speech recognition programs.In the course of this scientific study, results were obtained that indicate a significant increase in the practical efficiency of automatic speech recognition systems when introducing sound signal correction algorithms, which opens up additional opportunities for developing such software.In addition, the results of this scientific study clearly demonstrate the significant impact of the accuracy of the effects of speech recognition programs on the quality of development of multilingual corpora, which include relatively large volumes of texts.The practical significance of the results obtained in the course of this scientific work, as well as the conclusions formulated on their basis, lies in the possibility of their use in the development of a multilingual corpus and spontaneous speech recognition programs for their subsequent use in various information systems, to obtain results related to the need accurate decoding of automatic speech, taking into account all its characteristic features.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207