Skip to main content

MODELING NON-LINGUISTIC CONTEXTUAL SIGNALS IN LSTM LANGUAGE MODELS VIA DOMAIN ADAPTATION

Our latest machine learning paper has been published. link to view

MODELING NON-LINGUISTIC CONTEXTUAL SIGNALS IN LSTM LANGUAGE MODELS VIA DOMAIN ADAPTATION

Abstract: 
When it comes to speech recognition for voice search, it would be
advantageous to take into account application information associated
with speech queries. However, in practice, the vast majority
of queries typically lack such annotations, posing a challenge to
train domain-specific language models (LMs). To obtain robust domain
LMs, typically a LM which has been pre-trained on general
data will be adapted to specific domains. We propose four adaptation
schemes to improve the domain performance of long shortterm
memory (LSTM) language models, by incorporating application
based contextual signals of voice search queries. Most adaptation
strategies are shown to be effective, giving up to 21% relative
reduction in perplexity relative to a fine-tuned baseline on a heldout
domain specific development set. Initial experiments using a
state-of-the-art Italian ASR system show a 3.1% relative reduction
in WER on top of an unadapted 5-gram LM. In addition, human
evaluations show significant improvements on sub-domains from using
application signals. Our first three schemes focus on improving
domain perplexity, while the fourth scheme provides a possible solution
to simultaneously reduce domain perplexity while attenuating
catastrophic forgetting, which is known to be a common problem
in the adaptation of neural networks. We present a thorough exploration
on incorporating application signals, which could be easily
generalized for generic contextual information.

Authors:
Min Ma, Shankar Kumar, Fadi Biadsy, Michael Nirschl, Tomas Vykruta, Pedro J. Moreno

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

THE COPA CIRRUS SR22 PERFORMANCE REPORT

About this report This report was generated from data collected from 160 active COPA SR22 pilots. You can see the original survey here: http://tinyurl.com/sr22cruisesurvey . You can download PDF . Table of Contents What you will get out of this report Who were the pilots behind this survey What aircraft are counted in the survey Actual cruise speed and fuel flow Fuel flow vs TAS for NA lean of peak operations What is the most efficient altitude for NA SR22? Turbo SR22 performance at high and low altitudes Are TKS/FIKI planes slower? What is the fastest NA SR22 by generation? Who gets the best range? Are high hour NA SR22 engines slower and do they burn more fuel? How do LoP vs RoP performance compare? POH vs actual performance for NA Who is the fastest SR22? Conclusion About the author Frequently asked questions What you will get out of this report This report is for SR22 owners and buyers. How your SR22 performs compared to other SR22s How altitude affects perfo...

Why a SR22 leaseback is the worst financial decision an airplane owner can make

Airplane leaseback seem like a really good idea - your airplane becomes a business, generates income, which pays for maintenance, insurance, storage, and might even put a few bucks in your pocket. You'll hear this from flight schools, FBOs, airplane brokers and airplane manufacturers. The proposal I received for leaseback on my own plane looked very good, $72,000 income per year! The ugly truth is you leasebacks are a terrible financial decision. You're better off to park your plane in a hangar and not fly it at all. This was the proposal I received: Profit calculation for G2 SR22 in KFRG $300/hr rental rate -20% management fee $60 $240/hr income 300 hrs flown = $72,000 income per year First, there are some baseline increases due to more expensive commercial insurance and higher cost tiedown and required maintenance. These numbers are for an SR22 that was to be based out of KFRG. Annual fixed-cost increases to go to the flight school Flight sch...

How to configure engine power 55%, 65%, 75% on Piper Archer / Piper Cherokee

Most pilots, even CFIs, don't understand how to properly configure engine for various altitudes on a simple Piper Archer. The advice of "full rich below 3000" is simply wrong. Below is a simplified procedure based on the POH. It will ensure better performance, longer range, and longer engine life. The advice of "lean until running rough, then add some" is better, but still imprecise.  First, see POH section 4.27 CRUISING on how to configure engine. Simplified procedures Climb Mixture, throttle full forward Note the EGT temperature just after takeoff As you climb EGT will drop (too rich). Every 500 or 1000', lean mixture slightly to raise EGT back to the temperature you noted on takeoff.  DO NOT allow temperature to get higher than this! At 6000' lean much more to get peak EGT. Note the temperature. Every 600 or 1000' above 6000' are-lean mixture to get back to peak EGT. Best Power Cruise (fly fast): Mixture, th...