Subject: [Speechsc] Remarks on the verification result

From: "Reifenrath, Klaus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 09:34:48 -0400

Verification result (see §11.5):

SV/SI is not the primary focus of NLSML or EMMA. Therefore the result format
needs to be defined in more detail. Especially the grammar attribute (see
example on page 101) needs some explanation, because in SV/SI no grammars
are involved. Also the incremental and cumulative elements need to be
defined.

Num-frames seems to be very vendor specific. What if a vendor does not have
a 10ms frame rate? The intent of this parameter is not clear - i.e., if it's
intended to denote the amount of speech data (such as to make sure the
utterance is not too short for reliable verification) - then, the result
here should be a measurement in units of time (not frames). 

SV/SI engines that do not support gender or device detection cannot return a
meaningful value for 'matched'. Is this the reason why it is missing in all
examples? I suggest to remove it from the spec.

The spec should specify the range for verification-score and score: -1.0 -
1.0 (negative scores are recommended for failing, positive scores are
recommended for passing, size of number indicates confidence)

Regards,
Klaus

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