Question for Duncan Campbell re: Word-Spotting Capabilities

[Dave Bird]

In article <199908040949.KAA11179@odin.mimir.com>, Pete Bentley
<pete@sorted.org> writes
>At Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:37:56 BST, Dave Bird writes:
>>In article <199908031031.LAA02861@odin.mimir.com>, Pete Bentley
>><pete@sorted.org> writes
>>>Seems to me that topic spotting is a more useful goal anyway.  Even if 
>>>you have 100% accuracy in word spotting, you will generate too many
>>>false positive hits when that word appears out of context (eg "Boy did 
>>>the Yankees bomb tonight").
>>
>>
>> Topic spotting where the transcription is so bad it introduced
>> a 70-80% error rate in the words?  Do tell how........
>
>Er, I didn't say it was possible, I said that I thought it was a more
>useful goal to aim for than spotting isolated words.  



 What I meant was, if you cannot spot the words on a noisy any-voice
 channel (to such an extent they are 70 or 80% wrong),

 how you gonna spot topics in the transcribed words?



-- 
   ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
        (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses