Search

20 Dec 2011: Phonetic Pronunciations for Arabic Speech-to-Test Systems. ICASSP 2008. C. Longworth and M.J.F.

20 Feb 2018: Altogether 21 listeners, 11 native and 10 non-native,participated in the listening test. ... Statistical significance tests were performed assuming a bino-mial distribution of each choice.

20 Feb 2018: Reducingthenumber of system components leads to a simpler architecturethat iseasier to implement and test. ... Table 4. Analysis of detected speech segments using V2 and A2models on noisy test setGM2b.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

16 Jun 2008: During recognition the following procedure is used:1. Compensate the acoustic models for the test noise con-. ... dition2. Recognise the test utterance Y to obtain 1-best hypoth-. esis, h = h1,. ,

14 Sep 2010: All three test sets, A, B and C,were used for evaluating the schemes. ... This work used three of the test sets containing digit. sequences (phone numbers).

15 Aug 2007: Thispaper shows that multistyle models benefit from VTS compensationor Joint uncertainty decoding by reducing the mismatch betweentraining and test. ... Figures are reported against thedev03 test set encompassing3 hours of shows from six different news

23 Jun 2003: Acoustic Training Set-Up. • Acoustic/Training Test Data:– training data: 34.9 hours, 379 sides, from LDC CallHome (22.4hrs) and. ... dev02 numbers use manual segmentation, eval03 uses automaticsegmentation. • Comparison of dev02 and eval03

20 Feb 2018: test set. Although this biased the NOV93 results, later analysis showed that the. ... DEC94 test sets. The resulting noisy speech utterances had signal-to-noise ratios.

27 Sep 2000: VTLN warping in training and test both for GI and GDmodels for full and reduced bandwidth coding. ... 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We would like to thank BBN for providing the MiniTrain trainingand MTtest test set definitions.

21 Sep 2006: A detailed report of this test can be found in ourprevious work [10]. ... 20.2 fps).Figure 3 illustrates the recognition process on a typical test-ing clip.

20 Feb 2018: natural example from each wave file pair. Altogether 16 listeners, 8native and 8 non-native, participated in the listening test. ... The resultis shown in Fig. 4. Statistical significance tests were performed assuming a bino-mial distribution of each