The invention relates to automated systems for communication recognition and understanding.
Conventional methods for constructing spoken language systems involve training speech and language models prior to operation by transcribing speech input and finding existing patterns. This speech is manually transcribed and each utterance is then semantically labeled. The resultant database is exploited to train stochastic language models for recognition and understanding. These models are further adapted for different dialog states. Examples of such methods are shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,675,707, 5,860,063, 6,044,337, 6,173,261, 6,021,384 and 6,192,110, each of which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
This transcription and labeling process is a major bottleneck in new application development and refinement of existing ones. For incremental training of a deployed natural spoken dialog system, current technology would potentially require transcribing millions of transactions. This process is both time-consuming and prohibitively expensive.
The invention concerns a method and corresponding system for building a phonotactic model for domain independent speech recognition. The method may include recognizing phones from a user's input communication using a current phonotactic model, detecting morphemes (acoustic and/or non-acoustic) from the recognized phones, and outputting the detected morphemes for processing. The method also updates the phonotactic model with the detected morphemes and stores the new model in a database for use by the system during the next user interaction. The method may also include making task-type classification decisions based on the detected morphemes from the user's input communication.
The invention is described in detail with reference to the following drawings wherein like numerals reference like elements, and wherein:
Traditional ASR techniques require the domain-specific knowledge of acoustic, lexicon data and more importantly the word probability distributions. However, this invention concerns a method for unsupervised learning of acoustic and lexical units from out-of-domain speech data. The new lexical units are used for fast adaptation of language model probabilities to a new domain. Starting from a lexicon and language model, the relevant language statistics of task classification systems may be learned.
The invention concerns spoken language systems that adapts on-line to new domains. State-of-the art research or deployed spoken dialog systems perform constrained tasks (e.g., travel information, stock quotes, etc.) and they achieve high task completion rates. These systems are programmed to answer users' queries as long as they belong to the apriori defined domain. However, conventional spoken dialog systems do not react to changes in the task (e.g., a new category for a call-routing task) and adapt to unseen speech and language events. The crucial features for such an adaptive system are the acoustic and lexical units.
The conventional large vocabulary speech recognition framework requires acoustic and language model to be trained on domain-specific data. This data is usually collected through human-to-machine interaction protocols and speech utterances are transcribed for the purpose of acoustic and language model training. These models perform poorly in out-of-domain conditions and are not suitable for on-line learning of language. This is true despite the fact that large vocabulary lexicons can have millions of words and reduce the out-of vocabulary rate to zero. However, the main reason for such poor performance is the mismatch of the language model probabilities.
An alternative approach to large vocabulary recognition is to model phone sequences. There has been active research on this topic and high phone recognition rates have been achieved for restricted domains and language. While it is widely accepted that phone recognition performance is inferior to word-based large vocabulary speech recognition tasks (where large databases are available to train language models), phone recognition allows a system to perform task-independent speech recognition. For these reasons, task-independent speech recognizers should combine the accuracy of a word-based system and the acoustic event granularity of a phone-based system.
Baseline approaches to the teaching of speech recognition systems are found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,675,707 and 5,860,063, 6,173,261, and 6,192,110, which have been incorporated above herein by reference in their entireties.
While the morphemes may be non-acoustic (i.e., made up of non-verbal sub-morphemes such as tablet strokes, gestures, body movements, etc.), for ease of discussion, the systems and methods illustrated in the drawings and discussed in the below concern only acoustic morphemes. Consequently, the invention should not be limited to just acoustic morphemes and should encompass the utilization of any sub-units of any known or future method of communication for the purposes of recognition and understanding.
Furthermore, while the terms “speech”, “phrase” and “utterance”, used throughout the description below, may connote only spoken language, it is important to note in the context of this invention, “speech”, “phrase” and “utterance” may include verbal and/or non-verbal sub-units (or sub-morphemes). Therefore, “speech”, “phrase” and “utterance” may comprise non-verbal sub-units, verbal sub-units or a combination of verbal and non-verbal sub-units within the sprit and scope of this invention.
Non-verbal speech may include but are not limited to gestures, body movements, head movements, non-responses, text, keyboard entries, keypad entries, mouse clicks, DTMF codes, pointers, stylus, cable set-top box entries, graphical user interface entries and touchscreen entries, or a combination thereof. Multimodal information is received using multiple channels (i.e., aural, visual, etc.). The user's input communication may also be derived from the verbal and non-verbal speech and the user's or the machine's environment. Basically, any manner of communication falls within the intended scope of the invention. However, for ease of discussion, we will focus on verbal speech in the examples and embodiments set forth below.
In the speech recognition and understanding system 100, the phone recognizer 110 may receive an input communications, such as speech, from a user, customer, etc., in the form of verbal and/or non-verbal speech. As discussed above, the input speech may, of course, be expressed in verbal speech, non-verbal speech, multimodal forms, or using a mix of verbal and non-verbal speech.
The phone recognizer 110 is the task-independent component of the speech recognition and understanding system 100 which transcribes speech utterances from one domain and is trained on another domain. Prior to being integrated in the system 100, the phone recognizer 110 may be initially trained from an off-the-shelf database, for example. The database may be generated from recordings of users talking with human agents, responding to the prompt “AT&T, How may I help you?” (HMIHY). The characteristics of this data and early experiments are detailed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,675,707, for example, which has been incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. In any event, the phone recognizer 110 may be of any known design and performs the function of recognizing, or spotting, the existence of one or more phone in the user's input speech.
In an embodiment for recognizing non-acoustic morphemes, the phone recognizer 110 may be replaced in the figure by a sub-morpheme recognizer. The sub-morpheme recognizer would operate similar to the phone recognizer 110, but it would receive raw non-acoustic or a mixture of acoustic and non-acoustic speech from the user. Again, although the invention encompasses non-acoustic speech, for ease of discussion, only acoustic morphemes will be discussed in reference to the figures.
The acoustic morpheme detector 120 detects the acoustic morphemes present in the recognized phones from user's input request. The acoustic morphemes detected by acoustic morpheme detector 120 may be used for processing by any number of automated systems known to those of ordinary skill in the art. For example, the acoustic morphemes detected by the acoustic morpheme detector 120 may include a large number of verbal and non-verbal speech fragments or sub-morphemes (illustrated as phone-phrases for ease of discussion), each of which may be related to one of a predetermined set of task objectives. In this respect, each of the acoustic morphemes may be labeled with its associated task objective.
The acoustic morphemes detected by the acoustic morpheme detector 120 are also provided to the phonotactic model learning unit 140 for building a new phonotactic model. The phonotactic model learning unit 140 generates a new phonotactic model based on the detected acoustic morphemes found in the recognized phones from the user's input speech. The newly generated phonotactic model is then stored in the phonotactic model database 130 for use by the phone recognizer 110.
An exemplary process of the invention will now be described in
The acoustic morpheme detector 120 may detect phone sequences by computing information theoretic measures, such as the weighted mutual information Iw(x,y)=P(x,y)MI(x,y)=P(x,y)log P(x,y)/P(x)P(y), where x and y are two phone sequences. Weighted mutual information compensates for probability estimates biases introduced by rare events in the mutual information, MI(x,y). Alternative and computationally expensive methods for computing acoustic morphemes are entropy-minimizing units and multi-gram approaches. It can be shown both theoretically and experimentally that the n-best Iw is a close approximation of the exact entropy minimization problem. Such methods are shown in U.S. Pat. No. 6,021,384, which has been incorporated by reference above.
Excerpts from the detected acoustic morphemes are shown in
After the acoustic morphemes have been detected, the process proceeds on a dual track of processing and training. In the processing track, in step 3040, the acoustic morphemes are output for processing. One of the possible processes for detected acoustic morphemes may be to the map them into word sequences using a lexical access unit. In general, this process is not needed if the semantic units are not based on words. However, word-based language models are the natural candidates for cross-domain modeling, given the large availability of transcribed speech databases and the effectiveness word-based large vocabulary speech recognition.
Acoustic morphemes can be mapped to zero, one or many word sequences, for a given baseform lexicon. A conservative strategy to lexical access may be taken which considers only the exact match between baseforms in the lexicon and acoustic morphemes. This conservative strategy is dictated by the need to learn the most relevant lexical features of the domain with high precision and high rejection. These lexical features may be used to adapt on-line an off-the-shelf large vocabulary language model. The acquisition algorithm discussed above has selected 500 units that were matched against their most likely word mapping drawn from the lexicon. For example, in
Alternatively, the detected acoustic morphemes may be used by a task classification system 200 from
As an example of processes that may be performed as part of a possible task classification process using acoustic morphemes,
In step 4041, the task classification processor 210 determines whether a task can be classified based on the detected acoustic morpheme. If the task can be classified, in step 4047, the task classification processor 210 routes the user/customer according to the classified task objective. The process then goes to step 4070 and ends.
If the task cannot be classified in step 4041 (i.e. a low confidence level has been generated), in step 4043, a dialog module (located internally or externally) the task classification processor 210 conducts dialog with the user/customer to obtain clarification of the task objective. After dialog has been conducted with the user/customer, in step 4045, the task classification processor 210 determines whether the task can now be classified based on the additional dialog. If the task can be classified, the process proceeds to step 4047 and the user/customer is routed in accordance with the classified task objective and the process ends at step 4070. However, if task can still not be classified, in step 4049, the user/customer is routed to a human for assistance and then the process goes to step 4070 and ends.
Referring back to
The building of the phonotactic model by the phohtactic model learning unit 140 according to the invention involves at least two stochastic modeling processes. The first is to map phone sequence statistics into word statistics. If the most likely pronunciation of the word collect is K ae l eh K t, then P(collect)≠P(K ae l eh K t). In general terms:
where fi is a baseform of the word ω drawn from the set Bω. It is assumed from here forward that Pon-line(ω)≈P(fI), where f, is the most likely pronunciation.
The second problem is to transform the word probability vector of the prior distribution using the word statistics learned on-line. Given the small lexical coverage and large probability mass of the acquired features the two distributions have been merged with following scheme:
where:
α=ΣwεSPon-line(ω),β=ΣwεS,ΣwεVP(ω)
and S is the sec of selected words. This model has been tested to measure the perplexity of the HMIHY test set perplexity for a unigram model. The unigram perplexity on the HMIHY test set, in matched language model condition (PHMIHY(ω) is 128.3. The test perplexity using the switchboard language model (Pswitchboard(ω)) is 715.9. The test set perplexity was tested with the new word probability Ptarget(ω) and achieved a 39.4% relative improvement (433.9) with respect to the switchboard baseline.
Once the new phonotactic model is built, in step 3060 it is stored in the phonotactic model database 130 for use by the phone recognizer 110 during the user's next utterance or interaction. The database 130 may be any mechanism, memory, file etc. capable of storing information and data known to those of skill in the art.
As shown in
While the invention has been described with reference to the above embodiments, it is to be understood that these embodiments are purely exemplary in nature. Thus, the invention is not restricted to the particular forms shown in the foregoing embodiments. Various modifications and alterations can be made thereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
This non-provisional application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/235,861, filed Sep. 27, 2000, which is incorporated by reference in its entirety. This non-provisional application is also a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 09/690,721 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,085,720 and 09/690,903 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,681,206, both filed Oct. 18, 2000, which claim the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/163,838, filed Nov. 5, 1999, which are also incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4777600 | Saito et al. | Oct 1988 | A |
4827521 | Bahl et al. | May 1989 | A |
4866778 | Baker | Sep 1989 | A |
4882759 | Bahl et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4903305 | Gillick et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
5005127 | Kugimiya et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5029214 | Hollander | Jul 1991 | A |
5033088 | Shipman | Jul 1991 | A |
5062047 | Tanaka et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5099425 | Yuji et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5210689 | Baker | May 1993 | A |
5212730 | Wheatley et al. | May 1993 | A |
5297039 | Kanaegami et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5323316 | Kadashevich et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5333275 | Wheatley et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5337232 | Sakai et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5357596 | Takebayashi et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5375164 | Jennings | Dec 1994 | A |
5384892 | Strong | Jan 1995 | A |
5390272 | Repta et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5434906 | Robinson et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5457768 | Tsuboi et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5500920 | Kupiec | Mar 1996 | A |
5509104 | Lee et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5544050 | Abe et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5619410 | Emori et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5642519 | Martin | Jun 1997 | A |
5651095 | Ogden | Jul 1997 | A |
5659731 | Gustafson | Aug 1997 | A |
5666400 | McAllister et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5675707 | Gorin et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5719921 | Vysotsky et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5724481 | Garberg et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5724594 | Pentheroudakis | Mar 1998 | A |
5752230 | Alonso-Cedo | May 1998 | A |
5794193 | Gorin | Aug 1998 | A |
5832480 | Byrd et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5839106 | Bellegarda | Nov 1998 | A |
5860063 | Gorin et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5878390 | Kawai et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5905774 | Tatchell et al. | May 1999 | A |
5918222 | Fukui et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5960447 | Holt et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5983180 | Robinson | Nov 1999 | A |
6006186 | Chen et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6021384 | Gorin et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6023673 | Bakis et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6044337 | Gorin et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6064957 | Brandow et al. | May 2000 | A |
6138085 | Richardson et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6173261 | Arai et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192110 | Abella et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6208964 | Sabourin | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6233553 | Contolini et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243683 | Peters | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6308156 | Barry et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311152 | Bai et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6317707 | Bangalore et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6397179 | Crespo et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6601026 | Appelt et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6681206 | Gorin et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6745161 | Arnold et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6879956 | Honda et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6895377 | Kroeker et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6941266 | Gorin et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6961954 | Maybury et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7082578 | Fishkin et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7085720 | Gorin et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7286984 | Gorin et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7440897 | Gorin et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7620548 | Gorin et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
8010361 | Gorin et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
20040199375 | Ehsani et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 0062193 | Oct 2000 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 09/690,721, filed Oct. 18, 2000. |
A.L. Gorin, “Processing of Semantic Information in Fluently Spoken Language”, to appear in the Proceedings of the Int;\l. Conf. on Spoken Language Processing (CSLP), Oct. 1996, AT&T Research, pp. 1-4. |
A.L. Gorin et al., “Spoken Language Acquisition for Automated Call Routing in a Telephone Network”, Proceedings 1993 IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition, Dec. 12-15, 1993, p. 99-100. |
A.L. Gorin et al.. “Spoken Dialog as a Feedback control System”, ESCA Workshop on Spoken Dialogue Systems—Theories and Applications, Vigso, Denmark, May 30-Jun. 2, 1995, AT&T Bell Laboratories, pp. 173-175. |
A.L. Gorin et al., “Spoken Language Acquisition for Automated Call Routing”, ICSLP 94, 1994 International Conference of Spoken Language Processing, Sep. 18-22, 1994, Pacific Convention Plaza Yokohama, pp. 1483-1486. |
A.L. Gorin et al., “On Automated Language Acquisition” J. Accoust. Soc. Am. 97(6) Jun. 1995, pp. 3441-3461. |
A. L. Gorin et al., “An Experiment in Spoken Language Acquisition”, IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, vol. 2, No. 1, Par II, Jan. 1994, pp. 224-240. |
A.L. Gorin et al., “Automated Call Routing in a Telecommunications Network”, Proceedings, Second IEEE Workshop on Interactive Voice Technology for Telecommunications Applications, Sep. 26-27, 1994, pp. 137-140. |
R. Cole et al., “The Challenge of Spoken Language Systems: I Research Direction for the Nineties”, IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing; Jan. 1995, vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 1-21. |
L.G. Miller et al., “A Structured Network Architecture for Adaptive Language Acquisition”, ICASSP '92: Acoustics, Speech & Signal Processing Conference; 1992 vol. 1, I-201-I-204. |
A.L. Gorin et al., “On Adaptive Acquisition of Spoken Language”, Neural Networks for Signal Processing, 1991; 1991, pp. 422-431. |
Ponceleon et al., “Automatic Discovery of Salient Segments in Imperfect Speech Transcripts”, CIKM '01, Atlanta, Georgia, Nov. 5-10, 2001. |
A.L. Gorin et al. “How May I Help You?”, AT&T Las Research, p. 1-2 and 4, as it was to appear in the Proc. of IVITA, Philadelphia, Oct. 1996. |
Irene Langkilde et al., “Automatic Prediction of Problematic Human-Computer Dialogues in How May I Help You?”, AT&T Labs Research, pp. 1-4. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/699,494, “Method for Automated Task Classification and Routing”, filed Oct. 31, 2000, by A. Gorin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/699,495, “Automated Task Classification System”, filed Oct. 31, 2000, by A. Gorin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/699,496, “System and Method for Conducting Dialog with a User in an automatic Task Classification System”, filed Oct. 31, 2000, by A. Gorin et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/712,192, “Method and System for Predicting Problematic Situations in Automated Dialog”, filed Nov. 15, 2000, by A. Gorin et al. |
A.L. Gorin et al. U.S. Appl. No. 10/158,082, “Method and System for Automatically Detecting Morphemes in a Task Classification System Using Lattices”, filed May 31, 2002. |
Aberdeen et al., “Mitre: Description of the Alembic system as used in MET”, Proceedings of the TIPSTER 24-Month Workshop, pp. 461-462, 1996. |
Abney, Steven, “Chunks and Dependencies: Bringing Processing Evidence to Bear on Syntax” University to Tubingen, Oct. 17, 1991. |
Humphereys et al. University of Sheffield: Description of the LaSIE-II System as Used for MUC-7 In Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conferences, 1998. |
Rahim et al. “Robust numeric recognition in spoken language dialogue”, Speech Communication, vol. 34, 2001, pp. 195-212. |
Huang et al. “Information extraction from voicemail”, Association for computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Toulouse, France, 2001. |
Bikel et al. “An Algorithm that learns what's in a Name”, Machine Learning, vol. 34, pp. 211-231, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. |
Gotoh et al., “Named Entity Tagged Language Models,” IEEE International Conference in Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP '99, Mar. 15-19, 1999, pp. 513-516. |
Gaizaaukas et al., “Description of the LaSIE system as used for MUC-6,” In Processing of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-6), pp. 207-220, Nov. 1995. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60235861 | Sep 2000 | US | |
60163838 | Nov 1999 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09690721 | Oct 2000 | US |
Child | 09956907 | US | |
Parent | 09690903 | Oct 2000 | US |
Child | 09690721 | US |