593 research outputs found

    Decision Fusion and Contextual Information for Arabic Words Recognition for Computing and Informatics

    Get PDF
    The study of multiple classifier systems has become recently an area of intensive research in pattern recognition. Also in handwriting recognition, systems combining several classifiers have been investigated. An approach for recognizing the legal amount for handwritten Arabic bank check is described in this article. The solution uses multiple information sources to recognize words. The recognition step is preformed with a parallel combination of three kinds of classifiers using holistic word structural features. The classification stage results are first normalized, and the sum combination is performed as a decision fusion scheme, after which a syntactic analyzer makes final decision on the candidate words. Using this approach, the obtained results are very interesting and promising

    Automatic Arabic Handwritten Check Recognition

    Get PDF

    Off-line Thai handwriting recognition in legal amount

    Get PDF
    Thai handwriting in legal amounts is a challenging problem and a new field in the area of handwriting recognition research. The focus of this thesis is to implement Thai handwriting recognition system. A preliminary data set of Thai handwriting in legal amounts is designed. The samples in the data set are characters and words of the Thai legal amounts and a set of legal amounts phrases collected from a number of native Thai volunteers. At the preprocessing and recognition process, techniques are introduced to improve the characters recognition rates. The characters are divided into two smaller subgroups by their writing levels named body and high groups. The recognition rates of both groups are increased based on their distinguished features. The writing level separation algorithms are implemented using the size and position of characters. Empirical experiments are set to test the best combination of the feature to increase the recognition rates. Traditional recognition systems are modified to give the accumulative top-3 ranked answers to cover the possible character classes. At the postprocessing process level, the lexicon matching algorithms are implemented to match the ranked characters with the legal amount words. These matched words are joined together to form possible choices of amounts. These amounts will have their syntax checked in the last stage. Several syntax violations are caused by consequence faulty character segmentation and recognition resulting from connecting or broken characters. The anomaly in handwriting caused by these characters are mainly detected by their size and shape. During the recovery process, the possible word boundary patterns can be pre-defined and used to segment the hypothesis words. These words are identified by the word recognition and the results are joined with previously matched words to form the full amounts and checked by the syntax rules again. From 154 amounts written by 10 writers, the rejection rate is 14.9 percent with the recovery processes. The recognition rate for the accepted amount is 100 percent

    Typological parameters of genericity

    Get PDF
    Different languages employ different morphosyntactic devices for expressing genericity. And, of course, they also make use of different morphosyntactic and semantic or pragmatic cues which may contribute to the interpretation of a sentence as generic rather than episodic. [...] We will advance the strong hypo thesis that it is a fundamental property of lexical elements in natural language that they are neutral with respect to different modes of reference or non-reference. That is, we reject the idea that a certain use of a lexical element, e.g. a use which allows reference to particular spatio-temporally bounded objects in the world, should be linguistically prior to all other possible uses, e.g. to generic and non-specific uses. From this it follows that we do not consider generic uses as derived from non-generic uses as it is occasionally assumed in the literature. Rather, we regard these two possibilities of use as equivalent alternative uses of lexical elements. The typological differences to be noted therefore concern the formal and semantic relationship of generic and non-generic uses to each other; they do not pertain to the question of whether lexical elements are predetermined for one of these two uses. Even supposing we found a language where generic uses are always zero-marked and identical to lexical sterns, we would still not assume that lexical elements in this language primarily have a generic use from which the non-generic uses are derived. (Incidentally, none of the languages examined, not even Vietnamese, meets this criterion.
    corecore