Search

15 Aug 2007: Compensation Noise Est. Type %WER. None — 20.8. JointML VTS 19.1ML Joint 18.8. ... The best training scheme was. the JAT system, which exceeded matched and multistyle with VTSperformance at both 20 and 14 dB SNR.

20 Feb 2018: A positive reward of 20 isgiven at the end of the dialogue if the DM managed to fulfilthe user request and a penalty of 1 is applied per system turnto encourage ... The new exploration schemes were evaluated in this paperusing GP-SARSA. In the future,

20 Feb 2018: complete at least 20 dialoguesduring the session, under continuous supervision of a researchteam member. ... Trial # users average # calls median # callsAMT 140 6.5 2Cambridge 17 24.4 20.

20 Feb 2018: Usergoals are randomly generated and an (arbitrary) rewardfunction assigning 20 points for successful completionand -1 for every dialogue turn is used.

20 Feb 2018: The final system was evaluated as in the firsttask; although in this case, the training and evaluation procedurewas executed 20 times. ... by 10%-20% in comparison with the rewards obtained whenusing the handcrafted parameters.

13 May 2010: effect very similar to that observed with non-axially aligned,elliptical inclusions [20, 21]. ... This is very likely the “fillin” effect [20, 21]. 6. (a) 10 mm 0.

20 Feb 2018: This isdone by letting the dialogue system interact with a user simulator[20]. ... vol. 7, no. 3, 2011. 20. J. Schatzmann, B. Thomson, K. Weilhammer, H.

20 Feb 2018: by specifying a VoiceXML grammarthat instantiates slot values. Within the past 20 years, research on spoken language under-standing (SLU) has produced models that alleviate these issuesby learning to derive a ... 94.20 95.26TownInfo dataset with ASR

20 Feb 2018: F-score. C.Net. ContextPhoenix. Predicted F-score. 0 20 40 60 80 100. ... 20,no. 4, pp. 495–514, Oct. 2006. [20] M. Gašić, P. Tsiakoulis, M.

15 Feb 2005: sorting didev03 eval03 sttdev04 dev04f2 devallnone 18.0 15.9 21.2 26.9 20.3time 17.5 16.7 21.5 25.7 20.2spkr-start 17.5 17.9 ... 18.5. 19. 19.5. 20. mea. n D. ER. on. all. 24 d.

20 Feb 2018: It can be shown [20] that the marginal likelihood of the observedrewards is modelled by. ... 20] M Gašić, Statistical Dialogue Modelling, PhD thesis, Univer-sity of Cambridge, 2011.

20 Feb 2018: Table 4: Average dialogue WER. 0 20 40 60 80 100. ... WER for the three fully tested systems. 0 20 40 60 80 100.

10 Nov 2015: Bayes’ Rule is sometimes remembered as. posterior likelihood prior. 20 Engineering Part IIB: Module 4F10 Statistical Pattern Processing. ... 10. 20. 30. 40. 50. 60. 70. 80. 90. 100. False Positive.

19 Jan 2012: There is no space here for the derivation, but [20]gives the details. ... There is no space here for the derivation,but see [20] for details.

20 Feb 2018: Toreduce the noise introduced by forced choices, the 10 wave file pairswere duplicated and the order of the two systems were swapped.The final 20 wave file pairs were then shuffled

13 Jun 2013: First, we show score normaliza-tion methodology that improves in average by 20% keyword searchperformance. ... 20–27. [20] X. Cui, J. Xue, X. Chen, P. A. Olsen, P.

20 Feb 2018: 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000Training dialogues. 20. 15. 10. ... 20. 15. 10. 5. 0. 5. Ave. rage. rew. ard. RNNBNBN (constrained).

3 Jul 2018: 1 with rew =23.4,suc = 99.7% and in Env. 3 with rew =20.1,suc = 94.5%. ... 2016. Towards anontology-driven adaptive dialogue framework. InProceedings of the 1st International Workshop onMultimedia Analysis and Retrieval for MultimodalInteraction, pages

21 Feb 2022: dependent. • General approach tunable approach based on deep learning. 20/56. Model-based Pronunciation Features. ... General approach tunable approach based on deep learning. 20/56. Deep Learning Pronunciation Features [5].

24 Jul 2003: 7HLDA pruned bg 20.0 34.4 34.0 29.4MPElattice regen/comb 19.4 34.0 33.6 28.9. % ... Cambridge UniversityEngineering Department. Rich Transcription Workshop 2003 20. Woodland et al.: English CTS Systems.