The present invention is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/029,317, filed Jan. 5, 2005, now abandoned, entitled “A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USING A LIBRARY OF DATA TO INTERACTIVELY DESIGN NATURAL LANGUAGE SPOKEN DIALOG SYSTEMS,” U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/029,798, filed Jan. 5, 2005, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,185,399, entitled “A SYSTEM OF PROVIDING AN AUTOMATED DATA-COLLECTION IN SPOKEN DIALOG SYSTEMS,” and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/029,318, filed Jan. 5, 2005, now abandoned, entitled “BOOTSTRAPPING SPOKEN DIALOG SYSTEMS WITH DATA REUSE.” The contents of the above U.S. Patent Applications are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety.
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to speech processing and more specifically to reusing existing spoken dialog data to generate a new natural language spoken dialog system.
2. Introduction
Natural language spoken dialog systems receive spoken language as input, analyze the received spoken language input to derive meaning from the input, and perform some action, which may include generating speech, based on the meaning derived from the input. Building natural language spoken dialog systems requires large amounts of human intervention. For example, a number of recorded speech utterances may require manual transcription and labeling for the system to reach a useful level of performance for operational service. In addition, the design of such complex systems typically includes a human being, such as, a User Experience (UE) expert to manually analyze and define system core functionalities, such as, a system's semantic scope (call-types and named entities) and a dialog manager strategy, which will drive the human-machine interaction. This approach to building natural language spoken dialog systems is extensive and error prone because it involves the UE expert making non-trivial design decisions, the results of which can only be evaluated after the actual system deployment. Thus, a complex system may require the UE expert to define the system's core functionalities via several design cycles that may include defining or redefining the core functionalities, deploying the system, and analyzing the performance of the system. Moreover, scalability is compromised by time, costs and the high level of UE know-how needed to reach a consistent design. A new approach that reduces the amount of human intervention required to build a natural language spoken dialog system is desired.
In a first aspect of the invention, a machine-readable medium is provided. The machine-readable medium may include a group of reusable components for building a spoken dialog system. The reusable components may include a group of previously collected audible utterances. In some implementations consistent with the principles of the invention, the collected audible utterances may be transcribed and semantically labeled (e.g., with associated call-types and named entities).
In a second aspect of the invention, a machine-implemented method to build a library of reusable components for use in building a natural language spoken dialog system is provided. The method may include storing a dataset in a database. The dataset may include a group of reusable components for building a spoken dialog system. The reusable components may further include a group of previously collected audible utterances. In some implementations consistent with the principles of the invention, the collected audible utterances may be optionally transcribed and semantically labeled (e.g., with associated call-types and named entities).
In a third aspect of the invention, a method to build a library of reusable components for use in building a natural language spoken dialog system is provided. The method may include storing at least one set of data, each one of the at least one set of data including ones of the reusable components associated with audible data collected during a different collection phase.
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate an embodiment of the invention and, together with the description, explain the invention. In the drawings,
Various embodiments of the invention are discussed in detail below. While specific implementations are discussed, it should be understood that this is done for illustration purposes only. A person skilled in the relevant art will recognize that other components and configurations may be used without parting from the spirit and scope of the invention.
ASR module 102 may analyze speech input and may provide a transcription of the speech input as output. SLU module 104 may receive the transcribed input and may use a natural language understanding model to analyze the group of words that are included in the transcribed input to derive a meaning from the input. DM module 106 may receive the meaning of the speech input as input and may determine an action, such as, for example, providing a spoken response, based on the input. SLG module 108 may generate a transcription of one or more words in response to the action provided by DM 106. TTS module 110 may receive the transcription as input and may provide generated audible speech as output based on the transcribed speech.
Thus, the modules of system 100 may recognize speech input, such as speech utterances, may transcribe the speech input, may identify (or understand) the meaning of the transcribed speech, may determine an appropriate response to the speech input, may generate text of the appropriate response and from that text, generate audible “speech” from system 100, which the user then hears. In this manner, the user can carry on a natural language dialog with system 100. Those of ordinary skill in the art will understand the programming languages and means for generating and training ASR module 102 or any of the other modules in the spoken dialog system. Further, the modules of system 100 may operate independent of a full dialog system. For example, a computing device such as a smartphone (or any processing device having an audio processing capability, for example a PDA with audio and a WiFi network interface) may have an ASR module wherein a user may say “call mom” and the smartphone may act on the instruction without a “spoken dialog interaction”.
Input device 260 may include one or more conventional mechanisms that permit a user to input information to system 200, such as a keyboard, a mouse, a pen, a microphone, a voice recognition device, etc. Output device 270 may include one or more conventional mechanisms that output information to the user, including a display, a printer, one or more speakers, or a medium, such as a memory, or a magnetic or optical disk and a corresponding disk drive. Communication interface 280 may include any transceiver-like mechanism that enables system 200 to communicate via a network. For example, communication interface 280 may include a modem, or an Ethernet interface for communicating via a local area network (LAN). Alternatively, communication interface 280 may include other mechanisms for communicating with other devices and/or systems via wired, wireless or optical connections. In some implementations of natural spoken dialog system 100, communication interface 280 may not be included in processing system 200 when natural spoken dialog system 100 is implemented completely within a single processing system 200.
System 200 may perform functions in response to processor 220 executing sequences of instructions contained in a computer-readable medium, such as, for example, memory 230, a magnetic disk, or an optical disk. Such instructions may be read into memory 230 from another computer-readable medium, such as storage device 250, or from a separate device via communication interface 280.
Data for a new application of a natural language spoken dialog system are typically collected and transcribed. A user experience (UE) expert may help to define the new application by evaluating an initial set of transcribed utterances and determining relevant labels or call-types and named entities for these utterances. Some examples of call-types may include for example, customer service request (“I would like to be added to your mailing list”), or customer service complaint (“I would like to report a problem with my service”).
The UE expert may also select positive (label applies) and negative (label does not apply) guideline utterances for each label (or call-type). These guideline utterances and descriptions of the labels may be included in an annotation guide. The annotation guide may be organized by category areas where call-types within the same category may be grouped together (for example, “Billing Queries” might be one of the categories). A set of labelers may use the annotation guide to label additional transcribed utterances.
A library of reusable components may include spoken language understanding (SLU) models, automatic speech recognition (ASR) models, named entity grammars or models, manual transcriptions, ASR transcriptions, call-type labels, audio data (utterances), dialog level templates, prompts, and other reusable data. [Note: a dialog template is a parameterized portion of the call flow to perform a specific task, for example, collecting the user's SSN. In other words, it is similar to the concept of function calls in a traditional software library where the function arguments describe the input/output parameters. In the DM template case, and especially for natural language dialogs, in addition to the usual parameters such as prompts and grammars, there are exceptions that have to be handled in the context of the whole application. These are called context shifts. Imagine the system asking for a confirmation “Do you want your bill summary?” (yes/no question) and the user replying with “No, I'd rather have it faxed to my home number”. The DM template has to capture and handle this context shift which is domain dependent (yes/no questions are generic) and send it back to the main context shift handler. So, it is typical to use templates from a library that are cloned and modified in the context of the specific dialog (changes in the specific application context will not propagate back to the library)]. Thus, the library may include a collection of data from existing natural language spoken dialog systems.
The effort involved in maintaining a library has many benefits. For example, defining an extensible taxonomy of call-type categories may promote uniformity and reduce time and effort required when a new set of data is encountered. Moreover, a library may add organization that helps document the natural language spoken dialog system and may be used to bootstrap future natural language spoken dialog systems.
The data may be organized in various ways. For instance, in an implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, the data may be organized by industrial sector, such as, for example, financial, healthcare, insurance, etc. Thus, for example, to create a new natural language spoken dialog system in the healthcare sector, all the library components from the healthcare sector could be used to bootstrap the new natural language spoken dialog system. Alternatively, in other implementations consistent with the principles of the invention the data may be organized by category (e.g., Service Queries, Billing Queries, etc.) or according to call-types of individual utterances, or by words in the utterances such as, for example, frequently occurring words in utterances.
Any given utterance may belong to one or more call-types. Call-types may be given mnemonic names and textual descriptions to help describe their semantic scope. In some implementations, call-types can be assigned attributes which may be used to assist in library management, browsing, and to provide a level of discipline to the call-type design process. Attributes may indicate whether the call-type is generic, reusable, or specific to a given application. Call-types may include a category attribute or at a lower level may be characterized by a “verb” attribute such as “Request, Report, Ask, etc.” A given call-type may belong to a single industrial sector or to multiple industrial sectors. The UE expert may make a judgment call with respect to how to organize various application data sets into industrial sectors. Because the collection of utterances for any particular application is usually done in phases, each new application may have data sets from several data collection periods. Thus, each call-type may also have an attribute describing the data collection data set.
Each of sectors 302 may include an SLU model, an ASR model, and named entity grammars or models and may have the same data organization. An exemplary data organization of a sector, such as financial sector 302-1, is illustrated in
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the audio data and corresponding transcriptions may be used to train ASR module 102, and the call-type labels may be used to build new spoken language understanding (SLU) models.
The labeled and transcribed data for each of data collections 304 may be imported into separate data collection databases. In one implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, the data collection databases may be XML databases (data stored in XML), which may keep track of the number of utterances imported from each natural language speech dialog application as well as data collection dates. XML databases or files may also include information describing locations of relevant library components on the computer-readable medium including library 300. In other implementations, other types of databases may be used instead of XML databases. For example, in one implementation consistent with the principles of the invention a relational database, such as, for example, a SQL database may be used.
The data for each collection may be maintained in a separate file structure. As an example, for browsing application data, it may be convenient to represent the hierarchical structure as a tree {category, verb, call-type, utterance items}. A call-type library hierarchy may be generated from the individual data collection databases and the sector database. The call-type library hierarchy may be {sector, data collection, category, verb, call-type, utterance items}. However, users may be interested in all of the call-types with “verb=Request” which suggest that the library may be maintained in a relational database. In one implementation that employs XML databases, widely available tools can be used, such as tools that support, for example, XML or XPath to render interactive user interfaces with standard web browser clients. XPath is a language for addressing parts of an XML document. XSLT is a language for transforming XML documents into other XML documents.
In some implementations consistent with the principles of the invention, methods for building SLU models, for example, text normalization, feature extraction, and named entity extraction methods, may be stored in a file, such as an XML file or other type of file, so that the methods used to build the SLU models may be tracked. Similarly, in implementations consistent with the principles of the invention, data that is relevant to building an ASR module or dialog manager may be saved.
Referring back to
Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that other embodiments of the invention may be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, for example, personal computers, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. Embodiments may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by local and remote processing devices that are linked (either by hardwired links, wireless links, or by a combination thereof) through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices. A tangible computer-readable medium is an example of a memory storage device. The tangible computer-readable medium excludes software per se, energy or wireless interface. Such tangible computer-readable medium includes hardware memory components such as RAM 230, ROM 240, a hard drive 250 or the like. Thus, any such connection is properly termed a computer-readable medium.
Although the above description may contain specific details, they should not be construed as limiting the claims in any way. Other configurations of the described embodiments of the invention are part of the scope of this invention. For example, alternative methods of organizing reusable components stored in datasets may be used in implementations consistent with the principles of the invention. Further, the acts described in
The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/933,170, filed Jul. 2, 2013, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/029,319, filed Jan. 5, 2005, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,478,589, issued Jul. 2, 2013, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5675707 | Gorin et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5771276 | Wolf | Jun 1998 | A |
5794205 | Walters et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5899972 | Miyazawa | May 1999 | A |
5930700 | Pepper et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5963894 | Richardson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6021384 | Gorin et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6044337 | Gorin et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6173261 | Arai et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173266 | Marx et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6219643 | Cohen et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6266400 | Castagna | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6453307 | Schapire et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6571240 | Ho et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
7039625 | Kim et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7171349 | Wakefield et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7177817 | Khosla | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7197460 | Gupta et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7206391 | Chiu et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7219054 | Begeja | May 2007 | B1 |
7228278 | Nguyen et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7280965 | Begeja | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7292979 | Karas et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7398201 | Marchisio et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7567906 | Begeja | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7624014 | Stewart | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7860713 | Alonso et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7865358 | Green | Jan 2011 | B2 |
8433053 | Ulug et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
20020032564 | Ehsani et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020128821 | Ehsani et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020198719 | Gergic et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030007609 | Yuen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009339 | Yuen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014260 | Coffman et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030043978 | Gallagher | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030105634 | Abella et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030105638 | Taira | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030130841 | Bangalore et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030130854 | Galanes et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154072 | Young | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030187648 | Dharanipragada et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200094 | Gupta et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040006457 | Dehlinger et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019478 | Rucker | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040085162 | Agarwal et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040122661 | Hawkinson et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040186723 | Mizutani et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199375 | Ehsani et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040204940 | Alshawi et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040225499 | Wang et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040249636 | Applebaum et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050080628 | Kuperstein | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091057 | Phillips et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050105712 | Williams et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108775 | Bachar | May 2005 | A1 |
20050135338 | Chiu et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050234727 | Chiu | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050283764 | Chiu | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060009973 | Nguyen et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060025997 | Law et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060080639 | Bustelo et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060136870 | Wilson et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149555 | Fabbrizio et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060206332 | Paek | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070016399 | Gao | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070061758 | Manson et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20090202049 | Ulug et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20100268536 | Suendermann et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20150012280 | Shin | Jan 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1280136 | Jan 2003 | EP |
WO 9914740 | Mar 1999 | WO |
WO 9917524 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO 03088080 | Oct 2003 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Levit, Michael. Spoken Language Understanding without Transcriptions in a Call Center Scenario. Logos-Verlag, 2005. |
D. Hakkani-Tur, G. Tur, M. Rahim and G. Riccardi, “Unsupervised and active learning in automatic speech recognition for call classification,” 2004 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Montreal, Que., 2004, pp. I-429. doi: 10.1109/ICASSP.2004.1326014. |
Tang at al, “Call-type classification and unsupervised training for the call center domain,” Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding, 2003, ASRU '03, 2003 IEEE Workshop on, vol., No., pp. 204-208, Nov. 30-Dec. 3, 2003. |
Di Fabbrizio et al., “Bootstrapping spoken dialog systems with data reuse,” In Proceedings of 5th SigDial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, Boston, MA, May 2004. |
Guillevic et al., “Robust semantic confidence scoring,” In Proc. Internat. Conf. on Spoken Language Processing '02, Denver, pp. 853-856. |
Rochery et al., “Combining prior knowledge and boosting for call classification in Spoken language dialogue,” In International Conference on Accoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2002. |
Garijo et al., “BOGAR_LN: An Agent Based Component Framework for Developing Multi-modal Services using Natural Language,” Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3040, pp. 207-220, Conejo Urretavizcaya Perez de la cruz Eds. Springer-Verlag, 2004. |
Fosler-Lussier et al., “Using semantic class information for rapid Development of language models within asr dialogue systems,” in Proceedings of ICASSP01 Salt Lake City, USA, 2001, pp. 553-556. |
Baggia et al., “Language Modelling and Spoken Dialog Systems—the ARISE experience,” Proc. Eurospeech '99. |
M. Levit, “Spoken Language Understanding without Transcriptions in a Call Center Scenario,” Technische Kakultat der Universitat Erlangen-Nurnberg, Oct. 18, 2004. |
Iyer et al., “Unsupervised training techniques for natural language call routing” Proceedings (ICASSP '02), IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, May 13-17, 2002, vol. 4, pp. IV-3900-IV-3903. |
Di Fabbrizio et al., “Bootstrapping Spoken Dialog Systems with Data Reuse,” AT&T Labs, Research, Apr. 30, 2004. |
Riccardi et al., “Active and unsupervised learning for automatic speech recognition,” In Proceedings of the European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (EUROSPEECH), Geneva, Switzerland: Sep. 2003, p. 1825. |
Gokhan Tür et al. “Active Labeling for Spoken Language Understanding”. AT&T Labs—Research, Florham Park, New Jersey, USA, Sep. 2003. |
Gokhan Tür et al. “Active Learning for Spoken Language Understanding”. AT&T Labs—Research, Florham Park, New Jersey, USA, May 2003. |
Iyer et al., “Using Out-of-Domain Data to Improve In-Domain Language Model,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 4, No. 8, Aug. 1997, pp. 221-223. |
Gokhan Tür et al, “Unsupervised Learning for Spoken Language Understanding”. AT&T Labs—Research, Florham Park, New Jersey, USA, Sep. 2003. |
Iyer et ai., “Relevance weighting for combining multi-domain data for n—gram language modeling,” Computer Speech and Language, 13:287-282, 1999. |
Ammicht et al., “Knowledge Collection for Natural Language Spoken Dialog Systems,” AT&T Labs, EUROSPEECH 1999, vol. 1. Sep. 1999. p. 1375. |
Tur et al., “Active Learning for Spoken Language Understanding,” ICASSP 2003, pp. 276-279. |
Hakkani-Tür et al., “Unsupervised and Active Learning in Automatic Speech Recognition for Call Classification,” Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, IEEE International Conference in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 17-21, 2004, vol. 1, pp. 429-432. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160093300 A1 | Mar 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13933170 | Jul 2013 | US |
Child | 14963408 | US | |
Parent | 11029319 | Jan 2005 | US |
Child | 13933170 | US |