Subject: [Speechsc] Speed vs Accuracy and Sensitivity Threshold values

From: Jeff Kusnitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 15:50:05 -0800

Sections 8.4.2 and 8.4.3 describe the Sensitivity-Level  and 
Speed-vs-Accuracy settings, but they don't specify the ranges nor the 
default value.  To be consistent with other parameters, might I suggest 
the range be between 0 and 100 (which maps nicely to VoiceXML 2.0's range 
of 0.0 to 1.0), and default values that are either platform-specific, as 
is the case with confidence threshold, or just 50.

Thanks,
Jeff

_______________________________________________
Speechsc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speechsc

---

From: David Oran <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:58:11 -0500

> is the case with confidence threshold, or just 50.
Seems reasonable? any objections?
Dave.

---

From: Patrick Bennett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:00:15 -0500

David Oran wrote:

> --On Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:50 PM -0800 Jeff Kusnitz 
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
>

This is a draft specification after all, so why not just make some of 
those other parameters consistent with VoiceXML 2.0 and require 0.0 to 
1.0 for all of them (Confidence-Threshold on particular)?
Is there really much benefit for a MRCP 'user' in leaving these ranges 
undefined and vendor-specific?

Patrick Bennett

---

From: Sarvi Shanmugham <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:37:50 -0800

I am fine wiht either 0.0 to 1.0 or 0 to 100. My leaning is toward 
keeping the set of header fields that have a parallel in VXML to have 
the same range and default.
The default value is already specified as platform specific, and I would 
prefer to leave it as is, since different reco vendors have different 
default values or for that matter different charactersitics for the 
range of values.

Sarvi

---

From: Jeff Kusnitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:22:30 -0800

The problem with using the same values as VoiceXML uses is that VoiceXML 
values are 0.0 to 1.0, while MRCP are defined to be integer (the 
production for them is "1*DIGIT CRLF").  Confidence-level is specified in 
MRCP already as 0-100, while the VoiceXML counterpart is 0.0-1.0.

Thanks,
Jeff

> I am fine with either 0.0 to 1.0 or 0 to 100. My leaning is toward

---

From: Patrick Bennett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:29:08 -0500

I'm pretty late in the MRCP process so I'm sorry if this comes across as 
rude, but, what is the point of a vendor-neutral protocol like MRCP if 
an MRCP-client has to always be aware of the vendor which it is 
communicating with?  Wouldn't it make more sense to define a required 
value range and have the vendors provide a reasonable mapping?  
Considering Nuance typically uses 0 to 100 and SpeechWorks/VXML uses 0.0 
to 1.0, why not just use 0.0 to 1.0 and have Nuance (or other vendors) 
do the mapping in their MRCP servers?  The 0 to 1 range (good or not) 
definitely seems to be a bit more 'standard' (if there can be such a 
thing).  Providing so many opening for vendor specific interpretations 
severely (at least IMO) undermines the usefulness of MRCP.

Sarvi Shanmugham wrote:

> The default value is already specified as platform specific, and I 
> would prefer to leave it as is, since different reco vendors have 
> different default values or for that matter different charactersitics 
> for the range of values.
>
> Sarvi
>
> David Oran wrote:
>