Slashdot Mirror


Is Speech Recognition Finally 'Good Enough'?

jcatcw writes "Speech recognition software is fast, but it still may not be accurate enough. Clerical jobs usually ask for 40 wpm, but speech recognition software can keep up with someone speaking at 160 wpm. In Lamont Wood's demo it did very well at too/two/to and which/witch, but will it still render 'I really admire your analysis' as "I really admire urinalysis'? At 95% accuracy, people aren't jumping on the bandwagon. Wood's typing speed is about 60 wpm with 93% accuracy, so he found that using speech recognition was about twice as fast as typing. Those who type at hunt-and-peck speeds will experience results that are even more dramatic. There's really only one product on the US market: Dragon NaturallySpeaking from Nuance Communications. The free versions from Microsoft aren't up to the task and IBM sold ViaVoice to Nuance, where it's treated as an entry-level product."

17 of 313 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm.... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is Speech Recognition Finally 'Good Enough'?

    Is spinachry ignition rivaly gooery stuff? What the hell are you talking about?

    1. Re:Hmmm.... by cnettel · · Score: 4, Informative

      n-gram based language models are nothing new. Statistics is all fun and dandy, but it's no panacea. It might just be enough to throw in an even larger corpus (something like the complete Google index), but it's still hard. (BTW, n-gram Markov chains more or less originated in speech recognition, to get the individual phonemes right, and I'm quite sure they're doing at least something like it at the word level these days. It still sucks, as the quality users demand for proper dictation is extremely high.)

  2. Problems by Tribbin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a foreigner it is really hard to get the pronounciation right enough.

    Also command execution by others in the room is a problem.

    How about listening to music, or TV, and having the computer interpreting it.

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    1. Re:Problems by Sciros · · Score: 4, Informative

      It all depends what sort of corpus the SR system is trained on. So yeah, foreigners will have problems because a system trained for, say, British English will not perform well with American English. For this same reason an SR system trained for "normal" speech will do very poorly with lyrics in music.

      As for stuff like "i really admire your analysis" being interpreted as "i really admire urinalysis," that stuff can easily be ironed out by an n-gram based system that "ranks" English sentences based on probability. What is the chance that "urinalysis" will follow "your" which follows "admire"? Such things can be estimated well enough if you use a large corpus to train your n-gram system (as long as the corpus you're using for this is the same "kind" as whatever speech the SR system is interpreting -- that is, newswire, business meeting, etc.)

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
  3. This comment written by MS speech recognition by TodMinuit · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.

    --
    I wonder if I use bold in my signature, people will notice my posts.
  4. No. by Caspian · · Score: 5, Funny

    Speech recognition, handwriting recognition, species recognition... all of these suck, and will CONTINUE to suck, until strong AI is developed.

    And by that time, there will be a lot more important problems to worry about than making a computer understand Bubba Sixpack who can't type-- such as keeping the robots from taking over the planet in a bloody war.

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  5. Of course it's good enough by ral315 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I use it myself. It's wonder full. delete that. delete that. delete that. double the killer delete select all

  6. I would say yes by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  7. Good enough for what? by traindirector · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA mentions that many people stop using speech recognition software because of poor accuracy. I don't think that's the major reason. I think they start using it because it's a neat idea that seems to have a lot of promise, but quickly realize there are only a few situations where it's actually helpful. The end of the article mentions rough drafts; I'd also say it might be a decent choice

    • when you need to enter hand-written documents into a computer
    • for transcripts of a single speaker
    • informal free-thought when not surrounded by other people
    • when you have horrible typing skills

    For the majority of office tasks, it just isn't a good fit.

    So if the "good enough" is being useful in any way whatsoever, it sounds like we're almost there.

  8. "New Directions" by parvenu74 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I used to work for a company that has the words "new directions" in their name. When I told people where I worked I would make a rather long pause between the "new" and "directions" so as not to sound like I was saying something else. I wonder how this software would render it...

    1. Re:"New Directions" by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Funny

      Reminds me of when the company "Pen Island" or "Mole Station Nursery" set up their domain names...

    2. Re:"New Directions" by houghi · · Score: 4, Funny

      You though you had problems with "new directions"
      Can you imagine telling the software to go to this site?
      haatch tee tee pee double point slash slash slash dot dot org.
      http:///..org not found

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  9. Speech recognition IS good enough by rinkjustice · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm using Dragon NaturallySpeaking. Right now, as I write this calm it, comet, post, and it sure as hacking beats typing.

    Actually, I am using Dragon NaturallySpeaking right now, and it works very well. It actually works better if you speak quickly (as you normally would) and it's pretty good at inserting grammar along the way. I have bilateral tendinitis, and the software has been a godsend for me. I was even able to finish writing my book, a task that was becoming just too painful typing manually.

    Oh, and you are probably wondering how long it takes to train the software? About a half an hour, and I find the accuracy at around 95%.

  10. Pretty good by Richard+McBeef · · Score: 5, Funny

    95 percent is pretty good, only one word in twenty. I wouldn't have a problem with a 5% error ate.

  11. Re:Not Useful for Coders by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
    > "Set v underscore tab equals space parenthesis parenthesis x minus lev schema dot all recs concatenate..."

    Yeah, but if you put a beat to it, you've got something.

    { } . ! /
    & ; ^ # -
    < > @ \
    { } _ SYSTEM HALTED

    "Left titty, right titty, dot bang slash.
    Ampersand semicolon, caret pound dash.
    Less than greater than, at back slash,
    left titty, right titty, under score crash!"

    * # ! ! (
    ~ & | )
    ' " . . DEL
    # ^G ! ! working... done.

    "Star pound bang bang, open-paren.
    Tilde and pipe, close-paren.
    One quote, two quote, dot dot delete,
    pound bell, bang bang, process complete!"

    Google's USENET archive dates it back to 1990, but it predates the 1990 post ("Stuck Shift Key Poetry") to rec.humor.funny by several years.

    You haven't lived until you've seen a dozen drunken geeks trying to sing "Waka Waka", or the entirety of "Hatless Atlas", while seeing only one character at a time. Well, maybe you have, but this is Slashdot.

  12. Maybe the question should be... by Mahjub+Sa'aden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Instead of asking if speech recognition is "good enough", maybe we should be asking whether or not it's actually useful for anything in the first place. I mean, is it good enough... to do what?

    Can you imagine being in a cubicle farm full of people talking to their computers? Or trying to talk to your computer on the bus? You have to imagine that as computers become more ubiquitous, input methods will have to adjust alongside, and I simply can't see (or hear) speech recognition doing that very well.

    --
    What is is all that is. Isn't that obvious?
  13. Speech Reco Software Consolidation by __aajwxe560 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I am presently a financial customer of an enterprise speech recognition product that Nuance offers. For several years now, the speech recognition software industry has been under consolidation, with Nuance buying a few different competitors and technologies. Most recently, this dance has continued with Nuance being acquired by ScanSoft, a company known for specializing in type recognition.

    Nuance support is marginal at best, and through all the consolidations, understanding even within their own company of how the product works is quite lacking. We have found our own developers often times educating the Nuance support folks in various aspects of how the product is working, and then inquiring as to whether this is intended behavior or not. Crickets can often be heard finishing these types of conversations. We normally would have moved to another product under these conditions, but simply put - Nuance acquired what little was left, and now has no competition in the market. Competition is what spurs innovation, and so with the continued consolidation, it is hard to see significant advances in the technology without free help from academia.

    If you think the Microsoft monopoly is bad, imagine if they absorbed Apple and somehow took over Linux leaving you with a few "choices", but all under the Microsoft moniker. The technology is very neat and the enterprise level products do some basic things quite well, but there is still some glaring room for innovation that I don't expect anytime soon under present industry conditions.