Dragon Speak

Quote:

Maybe Jespah will stumble upon the thread and enlighten me.

Earlier, I sent her a PM with your question and a link.

Ironically you are using Dragon as an example to argue against my point that having a domain specific language model (i.e. a version just for legal text) won't help accuracy.

I think the problem is that you don't understand the process of turning sound into text. It is not nearly as straightforward as you suggest. The big problems isn't the difference between "than" and "that". You haven't understood that that process is a statistical one, and the statistics make all the difference.

Here's an interesting experiment-- read the following into your speech recognizer.

"The deafened ant was remanded into the custody of the sherriff".

I suspect if you put an unnatural exaggerated pause in the correct place, you might get the desired sentence. The reason is that in your language model, the phrase "deafened ant" is not very statistically likely, whereas the word defendant is rather likely to be near the word remanded.

Plus Bill, 600 or 1000 bucks doesn't seem like a ton of money for a law office. Law offices make their money by cranking out paper.

I'm also not sure if there is a size limit on the various vocabulary and statistical modules in the Standard version that is not in the Professional (Legal) version. Haven't looked into that.

An 85% recognition rate is good and high. But it's midwestern men (I do believe you fit the bill, er, Bill) who get the best recognition score. East coast women like me (and my boss) would routinely score in the mid-60s to low-70s back in '04. The boss's boss was from Hyderabad -- he often scored in the 20s. Our soft-spoken male coworker from Michigan used to be scored in the mid- to high-90s.

I'd also caution that, even with small issues like the radio, people often put on the "dictation voice", speaking more slowly and carefully, and deliberately choosing their words, avoiding ums and pauses, and in general behaving better, but not the way they normally do. Even if you don't think you're doing that, you might be. Fortunately, the product does work better with training -- but you should be training it a bit with sloppy speech, too, as that is more of a fact of life than the "dictation voice" is.

No, I specifically told you I am not trying to argue with you; other than the FACT that I am getting much better results than you predicted.

Vice President Johnson, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice, President Eisenhower, Vice President Nixon, President Truman, reverend clergy, fellow citizens:

We observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom -- symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning -- signifying renewal, as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three-quarters ago.

The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans -- born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage, and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge -- and more.

To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided there is little we can do -- for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

To those new states whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom -- and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.

To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required -- not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge: to convert our good words into good deeds, in a new alliance for progress, to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house.

To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations, our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support -- to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective, to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak, and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.

Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.

We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.

But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course -- both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.

So let us begin anew -- remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.

Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.

Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms, and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations.

Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce.

Let both sides unite to heed, in all corners of the earth, the command of Isaiah -- to "undo the heavy burdens, and [to] let the oppressed go free."¹

And, if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor -- not a new balance of power, but a new world of law -- where the strong are just, and the weak secure, and the peace preserved.

All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days; nor in the life of this Administration; nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.

In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who answered the call to service surround the globe.

Now the trumpet summons us again -- not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need -- not as a call to battle, though embattled we are -- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation,"² a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.

Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it. And the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

.....

jespah wrote:

I'd also caution that, even with small issues like the radio, people often put on the "dictation voice", speaking more slowly and carefully, and deliberately choosing their words, avoiding ums and pauses, and in general behaving better, but not the way they normally do. Even if you don't think you're doing that, you might be. Fortunately, the product does work better with training -- but you should be training it a bit with sloppy speech, too, as that is more of a fact of life than the "dictation voice" is.

Interesting caution/advice. I KNOW I've been speaking as crisply as I can in testing, and just assumed the dictator should develope a habit of doing so until it becomes second nature (already is for the guy who's been talking to a tape-recorder for 20+ years.) Interesting that you'd suggest teaching it a more natural rythym. Do you figure a trained Dragon wouldn't have a preference? Or are you merely pointing out that it isn't necesarily necesary?

Well, what I'm saying is (and I'm probably writing it badly) that people have a tendency to do the dictation voice for a while and then they get sloppy. But the product is trained to listen for you being all clear and stuff. What I think you may be doing is training it to listen for you being as perfect as you can possibly be -- which is fine if you want to dictate that way from now until Kingdom Come. If not, if you slip up, you have trained it one way, but have gone in another direction.

If one uses a normal conversational voice, Jespah, does DS/DD get used to and type natural phonological reductions, ie. I'm gonna ask you a new question; Ya'll hafta speak louder; Wadja say?; Wenizee comin'?; ...