Re: [Speechsc] Question on Verification Result Device type

Since these are terms of art, let's not change anything.

On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:59 PM, Nik Waldron wrote:

> Hi Christian,
>
> I'm not an expert on MRCPv2 but as someone working on Verification
> implementation and having some familiarity with the field I think that
> this is due to the time at which MRCPv2 was originally drafted.  At  
> that
> time (a part of) the state of the art was an idea known as handset
> normalisation or HNorm.  HNorm set about solving the problem that
> different handsets had very different log likelihood ratio scores.   
> There
> were several variants on the solution, but basically several scores  
> for
> different utterances against the same voiceprint, or scores for the  
> same
> utterance against the different voice prints (or a combination) were  
> used
> to normalise the score.
>
> In particular the microphone type (carbon button, or electret) were  
> major
> categories for distorting scores, and compensating for the  
> microphone type
> found to be effective.  I guess that in order for the system to  
> operate in
> an online way (updating the sets used for normalisation), it might be
> necessary for the results to be categorised by microphone type (if  
> known).
> Others more familiar with the motivations for these fields may wish to
> correct me.
>
> Things have moved on a bit since then, however if you do a search  
> (HNorm,
> TNorm or CNorm) you should be able to find the relevant papers.  If  
> the
> engine you are interested in does not support / use these types of
> normalisation or identify the categories then I'm sure 'unknown' will
> satisfy the specification.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
> NIK WALDRON
>
>
>
> This is an email from Fujitsu Australia Limited, ABN 19 001 011 427.  
> It is confidential to the ordinary user of the email address to  
> which it was addressed and may contain copyright and/or legally  
> privileged information. No one else may read, print, store, copy or  
> forward all or any of it or its attachments. If you receive this  
> email in error, please return to sender. Thank you.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> Speechsc mailing list
> Speechsc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speechsc
> Supplemental web site:
> &lt;http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/speechsc&gt;

Re: [Speechsc] Question on Verification Result Device type

Attachment: smime.p7s