Search

10 Jan 2005: gram. The reduction is greater if PLSA’straining text relates to the test set. ... The test set perplexities were calculated on the re-maining half of eval03 (eval03tst).

20 Feb 2018: 1. English STC baseline tested on the English test set asreported in [6]. ... Table 2: BLEU scores [?] over the test set translated usingGoogle Translate and Moses.

20 Feb 2018: The set of possi-ble values for each slot was different in the test set, which alsoincluded extra slots. ... A summary of the difference between thesmaller training domain and extended test domain of DSTC3is given in table 1.

19 Apr 2000: The windows were compared to a library of windows stored from previous shows from the broadcaster (the broadcast history) [In theory all the data in the test collection could be used ... The amount of commercial rejection with the VOA data is low, due

20 Feb 2018: Section 4 presents the results of bothobjective and subjective tests. Conclusions then follow. ... 4.2. Subjective listening tests. The previous objective measures show useful comparison infor-mation.

19 Jun 2023: Feedback 140. Speech Processing. 21. Free speaking prompt-response tests – speak for up to 1 minute. ... INTERSPEECH 2020. • S. McKnight et al, “Automatic Assessment of Conversational Speaking Tests”, UK Speech C.

22 Jun 2007: Table 3 shows the P1-P2 perfor-mance3 of these baseline models on the BC and BN tests sets. ... Table 6. Unadapted %CER onbcmdev05. The models were then evaluated on the BC test set,bcmdev05.

20 Feb 2018: Two tailed z-tests at the 95% confidence levelwere used to test the statistical significance of the differencebetween the success rates. ... The use of the AMT workers is substantially more efficientwhen compared to a controlled test.

24 Jul 2003: Backchannels not labelled separately in the training data.• Only the test data has reference ctm/mdtm files. - ... Bigram SULMs give largest reductions in %Err when combined with the PFM(using the current training and test data!). •

13 Jun 2013: As the test data was Levantine Arabic,there is little appropriate data for training language models. ... Forthis work all the clean Levantine Arabic transcriptions, exclud-ing the dev1 test data, was used.