11,656 research outputs found

    A Neural, Interactive-predictive System for Multimodal Sequence to Sequence Tasks

    Full text link
    We present a demonstration of a neural interactive-predictive system for tackling multimodal sequence to sequence tasks. The system generates text predictions to different sequence to sequence tasks: machine translation, image and video captioning. These predictions are revised by a human agent, who introduces corrections in the form of characters. The system reacts to each correction, providing alternative hypotheses, compelling with the feedback provided by the user. The final objective is to reduce the human effort required during this correction process. This system is implemented following a client-server architecture. For accessing the system, we developed a website, which communicates with the neural model, hosted in a local server. From this website, the different tasks can be tackled following the interactive-predictive framework. We open-source all the code developed for building this system. The demonstration in hosted in http://casmacat.prhlt.upv.es/interactive-seq2seq.Comment: ACL 2019 - System demonstration

    Multimodal Speech Emotion Recognition Using Audio and Text

    Full text link
    Speech emotion recognition is a challenging task, and extensive reliance has been placed on models that use audio features in building well-performing classifiers. In this paper, we propose a novel deep dual recurrent encoder model that utilizes text data and audio signals simultaneously to obtain a better understanding of speech data. As emotional dialogue is composed of sound and spoken content, our model encodes the information from audio and text sequences using dual recurrent neural networks (RNNs) and then combines the information from these sources to predict the emotion class. This architecture analyzes speech data from the signal level to the language level, and it thus utilizes the information within the data more comprehensively than models that focus on audio features. Extensive experiments are conducted to investigate the efficacy and properties of the proposed model. Our proposed model outperforms previous state-of-the-art methods in assigning data to one of four emotion categories (i.e., angry, happy, sad and neutral) when the model is applied to the IEMOCAP dataset, as reflected by accuracies ranging from 68.8% to 71.8%.Comment: 7 pages, Accepted as a conference paper at IEEE SLT 201

    Contex-aware gestures for mixed-initiative text editings UIs

    Full text link
    This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Interacting with computers following peer review. The version of record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu019[EN] This work is focused on enhancing highly interactive text-editing applications with gestures. Concretely, we study Computer Assisted Transcription of Text Images (CATTI), a handwriting transcription system that follows a corrective feedback paradigm, where both the user and the system collaborate efficiently to produce a high-quality text transcription. CATTI-like applications demand fast and accurate gesture recognition, for which we observed that current gesture recognizers are not adequate enough. In response to this need we developed MinGestures, a parametric context-aware gesture recognizer. Our contributions include a number of stroke features for disambiguating copy-mark gestures from handwritten text, plus the integration of these gestures in a CATTI application. It becomes finally possible to create highly interactive stroke-based text-editing interfaces, without worrying to verify the user intent on-screen. We performed a formal evaluation with 22 e-pen users and 32 mouse users using a gesture vocabulary of 10 symbols. MinGestures achieved an outstanding accuracy (<1% error rate) with very high performance (<1 ms of recognition time). We then integrated MinGestures in a CATTI prototype and tested the performance of the interactive handwriting system when it is driven by gestures. Our results show that using gestures in interactive handwriting applications is both advantageous and convenient when gestures are simple but context-aware. Taken together, this work suggests that text-editing interfaces not only can be easily augmented with simple gestures, but also may substantially improve user productivity.This work has been supported by the European Commission through the 7th Framework Program (tranScriptorium: FP7- ICT-2011-9, project 600707 and CasMaCat: FP7-ICT-2011-7, project 287576). It has also been supported by the Spanish MINECO under grant TIN2012-37475-C02-01 (STraDa), and the Generalitat Valenciana under grant ISIC/2012/004 (AMIIS).Leiva, LA.; Alabau, V.; Romero Gómez, V.; Toselli, AH.; Vidal, E. (2015). Contex-aware gestures for mixed-initiative text editings UIs. Interacting with Computers. 27(6):675-696. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu019S675696276Alabau V. Leiva L. A. Transcribing Handwritten Text Images with a Word Soup Game. Proc. Extended Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI EA) 2012.Alabau V. Rodríguez-Ruiz L. Sanchis A. Martínez-Gómez P. Casacuberta F. On Multimodal Interactive Machine Translation Using Speech Recognition. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI). 2011a.Alabau V. Sanchis A. Casacuberta F. Improving On-Line Handwritten Recognition using Translation Models in Multimodal Interactive Machine Translation. Proc. Assoc. Comput. Linguistics (ACL) 2011b.Alabau, V., Sanchis, A., & Casacuberta, F. (2014). Improving on-line handwritten recognition in interactive machine translation. Pattern Recognition, 47(3), 1217-1228. doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2013.09.035Anthony L. Wobbrock J. O. A Lightweight Multistroke Recognizer for User Interface Prototypes. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI). 2010.Anthony L. Wobbrock J. O. N-Protractor: a Fast and Accurate Multistroke Recognizer. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI) 2012.Anthony L. Vatavu R.-D. Wobbrock J. O. Understanding the Consistency of Users' Pen and Finger Stroke Gesture Articulation. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI). 2013.Appert C. Zhai S. Using Strokes as Command Shortcuts: Cognitive Benefits and Toolkit Support. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst. (CHI) 2009.Bahlmann C. Haasdonk B. Burkhardt H. On-Line Handwriting Recognition with Support Vector Machines: A Kernel Approach. Proc. Int. Workshop Frontiers Handwriting Recognition (IWFHR). 2001.Bailly G. Lecolinet E. Nigay L. Flower Menus: a New Type of Marking Menu with Large Menu Breadth, within Groups and Efficient Expert Mode Memorization. Proc.Work. Conf. Adv. Vis. Interfaces (AVI) 2008.Balakrishnan R. Patel P. The PadMouse: Facilitating Selection and Spatial Positioning for the Non-Dominant Hand. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 1998.Bau O. Mackay W. E. Octopocus: A Dynamic Guide for Learning Gesture-Based Command Sets. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 2008.Belaid A. Haton J. A syntactic approach for handwritten formula recognition. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 1984;6:105-111.Bosch V. Bordes-Cabrera I. Munoz P. C. Hernández-Tornero C. Leiva L. A. Pastor M. Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Transcribing a XVII Century Handwritten Botanical Specimen Book from Scratch. Proc. Int. Conf. Digital Access Textual Cultural Heritage (DATeCH). 2014.Buxton W. The natural language of interaction: a perspective on non-verbal dialogues. INFOR 1988;26:428-438.Cao X. Zhai S. Modeling Human Performance of Pen Stroke Gestures. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 2007.Castro-Bleda M. J. España-Boquera S. Llorens D. Marzal A. Prat F. Vilar J. M. Zamora-Martinez F. Speech Interaction in a Multimodal Tool for Handwritten Text Transcription. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI) 2011.Connell S. D. Jain A. K. Template-based on-line character recognition. Pattern Recognition 2000;34:1-14.Costagliola G. Deufemia V. Polese G. Risi M. A Parsing Technique for Sketch Recognition Systems. Proc. 2004 IEEE Symp. Vis. Lang. Hum. Centric Comput. (VLHCC). 2004.Culotta, A., Kristjansson, T., McCallum, A., & Viola, P. (2006). Corrective feedback and persistent learning for information extraction. Artificial Intelligence, 170(14-15), 1101-1122. doi:10.1016/j.artint.2006.08.001Deepu V. Madhvanath S. Ramakrishnan A. Principal Component Analysis for Online Handwritten Character Recognition. Proc. Int. Conf. Pattern Recognition (ICPR). 2004.Delaye A. Sekkal R. Anquetil E. Continuous Marking Menus for Learning Cursive Pen-Based Gestures. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. User Interfaces (IUI) 2011.Dimitriadis Y. Coronado J. Towards an art-based mathematical editor that uses on-line handwritten symbol recognition. Pattern Recognition 1995;8:807-822.El Meseery M. El Din M. F. Mashali S. Fayek M. Darwish N. Sketch Recognition Using Particle Swarm Algorithms. Proc. 16th IEEE Int. Conf. Image Process. (ICIP). 2009.Goldberg D. Goodisman A. Stylus User Interfaces for Manipulating Text. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 1991.Goldberg D. Richardson C. Touch-Typing with a Stylus. Proc. INTERCHI'93 Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. 1993.Stevens, M. E. (1968). Selected pattern recognition projects in Europe. Pattern Recognition, 1(2), 103-118. doi:10.1016/0031-3203(68)90002-2Hardock G. Design Issues for Line Driven Text Editing/ Annotation Systems. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI). 1991.Hardock G. Kurtenbach G. Buxton W. A Marking Based Interface for Collaborative Writing. Proc.ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 1993.Hinckley K. Baudisch P. Ramos G. Guimbretiere F. Design and Analysis of Delimiters for Selection-Action Pen Gesture Phrases in Scriboli. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 2005.Hong J. I. Landay J. A. SATIN: A Toolkit for Informal Ink-Based Applications. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 2000.Horvitz E. Principles of Mixed-Initiative User Interfaces. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 1999.Huerst W. Yang J. Waibel A. Interactive Error Repair for an Online Handwriting Interface. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI) 2010.Jelinek F. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press; 1998. Statistical Methods for Speech Recognition.Johansson S. Atwell E. Garside R. Leech G. The Tagged LOB Corpus, User's Manual. Norwegian Computing Center for the Humanities. 1996.Karat C.-M. Halverson C. Horn D. Karat J. Patterns of Entry and Correction in Large Vocabulary Continuous Speech Recognition Systems. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 1999.Kerrick, D. D., & Bovik, A. C. (1988). Microprocessor-based recognition of handprinted characters from a tablet input. Pattern Recognition, 21(5), 525-537. doi:10.1016/0031-3203(88)90011-8Koschinski M. Winkler H. Lang M. Segmentation and Recognition of Symbols within Handwritten Mathematical Expressions. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics Speech Signal Process. (ICASSP). 1995.Kosmala A. Rigoll G. On-Line Handwritten Formula Recognition Using Statistical Methods. Proc. Int. Conf. Pattern Recognition (ICPR) 1998.Kristensson P. O. Discrete and continuous shape writing for text entry and control. 2007. Ph.D. Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden.Kristensson P. O. Denby L. C. Text Entry Performance of State of the Art Unconstrained Handwriting Recognition: a Longitudinal User Study. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 2009.Kristensson P. O. Denby L. C. Continuous Recognition and Visualization of Pen Strokes and Touch-Screen Gestures. Proc. Eighth Eurograph. Symp. Sketch-Based Interfaces Model. (SBIM) 2011.Kristensson P. O. Zhai S. SHARK2: A Large Vocabulary Shorthand Writing System for Pen-Based Computers. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST). 2004.Kurtenbach G. P. The design and evaluation of marking menus. 1991. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Toronto.Kurtenbach G. P. Buxton W. Issues in Combining Marking and Direct Manipulation Techniques. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST). 1991.Kurtenbach G. Buxton W. User Learning and Performance with Marking Menus. Proc. Extended Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI EA) 1994.Kurtenbach, G., Sellen, A., & Buxton, W. (1993). An Empirical Evaluation of Some Articulatory and Cognitive Aspects of Marking Menus. Human-Computer Interaction, 8(1), 1-23. doi:10.1207/s15327051hci0801_1LaLomia M. User Acceptance of Handwritten Recognition Accuracy. Proc. Extended Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI EA). 1994.Leiva L. A. Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Evaluating an Interactive–Predictive Paradigm on Handwriting Transcription: A Case Study and Lessons Learned. Proc. 35th Annu. IEEE Comput. Softw. Appl. Conf. (COMPSAC) 2011.Leiva L. A. Alabau V. Vidal E. Error-Proof, High-Performance, and Context-Aware Gestures for Interactive Text Edition. Proc. Extended Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI EA). 2013.Li Y. Protractor: A Fast and Accurate Gesture Recognizer. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI) 2010.Li W. Hammond T. Using Scribble Gestures to Enhance Editing Behaviors of Sketch Recognition Systems. Proc. Extended Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI EA). 2012.Liao C. Guimbretière F. Hinckley K. Hollan J. Papiercraft: a gesture-based command system for interactive paper. ACM Trans. Comput.–Hum. Interaction (TOCHI) 2008;14:18:1-18:27.Liu P. Soong F. K. Word Graph Based Speech Rcognition Error Correction by Handwriting Input. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI). 2006.Long A. Landay J. Rowe L. Implications for a Gesture Design Tool. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI) 1999.Long A. C. Jr. Landay J. A. Rowe L. A. Michiels J. Visual Similarity of Pen Gestures. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (CHI). 2000.MacKenzie, I. S., & Chang, L. (1999). A performance comparison of two handwriting recognizers. Interacting with Computers, 11(3), 283-297. doi:10.1016/s0953-5438(98)00030-7MacKenzie I. S. Tanaka-Ishii K. San Francisco, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 2007. Text Entry Systems: Mobility, Accessibility, Universality.MARTI, U.-V., & BUNKE, H. (2001). USING A STATISTICAL LANGUAGE MODEL TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF AN HMM-BASED CURSIVE HANDWRITING RECOGNITION SYSTEM. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 15(01), 65-90. doi:10.1142/s0218001401000848Marti, U.-V., & Bunke, H. (2002). The IAM-database: an English sentence database for offline handwriting recognition. International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition, 5(1), 39-46. doi:10.1007/s100320200071Martín-Albo D. Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Multimodal computer-assisted transcription of text images at character-level interaction. Int. J. Pattern Recogn. Artif. Intell. 2012;26:1-19.Marzinkewitsch R. Operating Computer Algebra Systems by Hand-Printed Input. Proc. Int. Symp. Symbolic Algebr. Comput. (ISSAC). 1991.Mas, J., Llados, J., Sanchez, G., & Jorge, J. A. P. (2010). A syntactic approach based on distortion-tolerant Adjacency Grammars and a spatial-directed parser to interpret sketched diagrams. Pattern Recognition, 43(12), 4148-4164. doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2010.07.003Moyle M. Cockburn A. Analysing Mouse and Pen Flick Gestures. Proc. SIGCHI-NZ Symp. Comput.–Hum. Interact. (CHINZ). 2002.Nakayama Y. A Prototype Pen-Input Mathematical Formula Editor. Proc. AACE EdMedia 1993.Ogata J. Goto M. Speech Repair: Quick Error Correction Just by Using Selection Operation for Speech Input Interface. Proc. Eurospeech. 2005.Ortiz-Martínez D. Leiva L. A. Alabau V. Casacuberta F. Interactive Machine Translation using a Web-Based Architecture. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. User Interfaces (IUI) 2010.Ortiz-Martínez D. Leiva L. A. Alabau V. García-Varea I. Casacuberta F. An Interactive Machine Translation System with Online Learning. Proc. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. (ACL). 2011.Michael Powers, V. (1973). Pen direction sequences in character recognition. Pattern Recognition, 5(4), 291-302. doi:10.1016/0031-3203(73)90022-8Raab F. Extremely efficient menu selection: Marking menus for the Flash platform. 2009. Available at http://www.betriebsraum.de/blog/2009/07/21/efficient-gesture-recognition-and-corner-finding-in-as3/ (retrieved on May 2012).Revuelta-Martínez A. Rodríguez L. García-Varea I. A Computer Assisted Speech Transcription System. Proc. Eur. Chap. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. (EACL). 2012.Revuelta-Martínez, A., Rodríguez, L., García-Varea, I., & Montero, F. (2013). Multimodal interaction for information retrieval using natural language. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 35(5), 428-441. doi:10.1016/j.csi.2012.11.002Rodríguez L. García-Varea I. Revuelta-Martínez A. Vidal E. A Multimodal Interactive Text Generation System. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces Workshop Mach. Learn. Multimodal Interact. (ICMI-MLMI). 2010a.Rodríguez L. García-Varea I. Vidal E. Multi-Modal Computer Assisted Speech Transcription. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces Workshop Mach. Learn. Multimodal Interact. (ICMI-MLMI) 2010b.Romero V. Leiva L. A. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Interactive Multimodal Transcription of Text Images using a Web-Based Demo System. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. User Interfaces (IUI). 2009a.Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Using Mouse Feedback in Computer Assisted Transcription of Handwritten Text Images. Proc. Int. Conf. Doc. Anal. Recogn. (ICDAR) 2009b.Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Study of Different Interactive Editing Operations in an Assisted Transcription System. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI). 2011.Romero V. Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Vol. 80. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company; 2012. Multimodal Interactive Handwritten Text Transcription.Rubine, D. (1991). Specifying gestures by example. ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 25(4), 329-337. doi:10.1145/127719.122753Rubine D. H. 1991b. The automatic recognition of gestures. Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University.Sánchez-Sáez R. Leiva L. A. Sánchez J. A. Benedí J. M. Interactive Predictive Parsing using a Web-Based Architecture. Proc. North Am. Chap. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 2010.Saund E. Fleet D. Larner D. Mahoney J. Perceptually-Supported Image Editing of Text and Graphics. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 2003.Shilman M. Tan D. S. Simard P. CueTIP: a Mixed-Initiative Interface for Correcting Handwriting Errors. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST). 2006.Signer B. Kurmann U. Norrie M. C. igesture: A General Gesture Recognition Framework. Proc. Int. Conf. Doc. Anal. Recogn. (ICDAR) 2007.Smithies S. Novins K. Arvo J. A handwriting-based equation editor. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI). 1999.Suhm, B., Myers, B., & Waibel, A. (2001). Multimodal error correction for speech user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 8(1), 60-98. doi:10.1145/371127.371166Tappert C. C. Mosley P. H. Recent advances in pen computing. 2001. Technical Report 166, Pace University, available: http://support.csis.pace.edu.Toselli, A. H., Romero, V., Pastor, M., & Vidal, E. (2010). Multimodal interactive transcription of text images. Pattern Recognition, 43(5), 1814-1825. doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2009.11.019Toselli A. H. Vidal E. Casacuberta F. , editors. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 2011. Multimodal-Interactive Pattern Recognition and Applications.Tseng S. Fogg B. Credibility and computing technology. Commun. ACM 1999;42:39-44.Vatavu R.-D. Anthony L. Wobbrock J. O. Gestures as Point Clouds: A P Recognizer for User Interface Prototypes. Proc. Int. Conf. Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI). 2012.Vertanen K. Kristensson P. O. Parakeet: A Continuous Speech Recognition System for Mobile Touch-Screen Devices. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. User Interfaces (IUI) 2009.Vidal E. Rodríguez L. Casacuberta F. García-Varea I. Mach. Learn. Multimodal Interact., Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. Vol. 4892. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2008. Interactive Pattern Recognition.Wang X. Li J. Ao X. Wang G. Dai G. Multimodal Error Correction for Continuous Handwriting Recognition in Pen-Based User Interfaces. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. User Interfaces (IUI). 2006.Wang L. Hu T. Liu P. Soong F. K. Efficient Handwriting Correction of Speech Recognition Errors with Template Constrained Posterior (TCP). Proc. INTERSPEECH 2008.Wobbrock J. O. Wilson A. D. Li Y. Gestures without Libraries, Toolkits or Training: A $1 Recognizer for User Interface Prototypes. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST). 2007.Wolf C. G. Morrel-Samuels P. The use of hand-drawn gestures for text editing. Int. J. Man–Mach. Stud. 1987;27:91-102.Zeleznik R. Miller T. Fluid Inking: Augmenting the Medium of Free-Form Inking with Gestures. Proc. Conf. Graph. Interface (GI). 2006.Yong Zhang, McCullough, C., Sullins, J. R., & Ross, C. R. (2010). Hand-Drawn Face Sketch Recognition by Humans and a PCA-Based Algorithm for Forensic Applications. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 40(3), 475-485. doi:10.1109/tsmca.2010.2041654Zhao S. Balakrishnan R. Simple vs. Compound Mark Hierarchical Marking Menus. Proc. ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol. (UIST) 2004

    Implementation of a Human-Computer Interface for Computer Assisted Translation and Handwritten Text Recognition

    Full text link
    A human-computer interface is developed to provide services of computer assisted machine translation (CAT) and computer assisted transcription of handwritten text images (CATTI). The back-end machine translation (MT) and handwritten text recognition (HTR) systems are provided by the Pattern Recognition and Human Language Technology (PRHLT) research group. The idea is to provide users with easy to use tools to convert interactive translation and transcription feasible tasks. The assisted service is provided by remote servers with CAT or CATTI capabilities. The interface supplies the user with tools for efficient local edition: deletion, insertion and substitution.Ocampo Sepúlveda, JC. (2009). Implementation of a Human-Computer Interface for Computer Assisted Translation and Handwritten Text Recognition. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/14318Archivo delegad

    Symbol Emergence in Robotics: A Survey

    Full text link
    Humans can learn the use of language through physical interaction with their environment and semiotic communication with other people. It is very important to obtain a computational understanding of how humans can form a symbol system and obtain semiotic skills through their autonomous mental development. Recently, many studies have been conducted on the construction of robotic systems and machine-learning methods that can learn the use of language through embodied multimodal interaction with their environment and other systems. Understanding human social interactions and developing a robot that can smoothly communicate with human users in the long term, requires an understanding of the dynamics of symbol systems and is crucially important. The embodied cognition and social interaction of participants gradually change a symbol system in a constructive manner. In this paper, we introduce a field of research called symbol emergence in robotics (SER). SER is a constructive approach towards an emergent symbol system. The emergent symbol system is socially self-organized through both semiotic communications and physical interactions with autonomous cognitive developmental agents, i.e., humans and developmental robots. Specifically, we describe some state-of-art research topics concerning SER, e.g., multimodal categorization, word discovery, and a double articulation analysis, that enable a robot to obtain words and their embodied meanings from raw sensory--motor information, including visual information, haptic information, auditory information, and acoustic speech signals, in a totally unsupervised manner. Finally, we suggest future directions of research in SER.Comment: submitted to Advanced Robotic

    Translating On the Go? : Investigating the Potential of Multimodal Mobile Devices for Interactive Translation Dictation

    Get PDF
    This article provides a general overview of interactive translation dictation (ITD), an emerging translation technique that involves interacting with multimodal voice-and-touch-enabled devices such as touch-screen computers, tablets and smartphones. The author discusses the interest in integrating new techniques and technologies into the translation sector, provides a brief description of a recent experiment investigating the potential and challenges of ITD and outlines avenues for future work.Aquest article proveeix un panorama general sobre la traducció dictada interactiva (TDI), tècnica de traducció emergent que implica interactuar amb dispositius multimodals activats amb la veu i el tacte com ara els ordinadors de pantalla tàctil, les tauletes i els telèfons intel·ligents. L'autor examina l'interès d'integrar noves tècnicas i tecnologies al sector de la traducció, proveeix una breu descripció d'un experiment recent que investiga el potencial i els reptes de la TDI, i conclou indicant algunes avingudes per a la recerca futura.Este artículo provee un panorama general sobre la traducción dictada interactiva (TDI), técnica de traducción emergente que implica interactuar con dispositivos multimodales activados con la voz y el tacto tales como los ordenadores de pantalla táctil, las tabletas y los teléfonos inteligentes. El autor examina el interés en integrar nuevas técnicas y tecnologías al sector de la traducción, provee una breve descripción de un experimento reciente que investiga el potencial y los retos de la TDI, y concluye indicando algunas avenidas para investigaciones futuras

    Augmenting Librispeech with French Translations: A Multimodal Corpus for Direct Speech Translation Evaluation

    Full text link
    Recent works in spoken language translation (SLT) have attempted to build end-to-end speech-to-text translation without using source language transcription during learning or decoding. However, while large quantities of parallel texts (such as Europarl, OpenSubtitles) are available for training machine translation systems, there are no large (100h) and open source parallel corpora that include speech in a source language aligned to text in a target language. This paper tries to fill this gap by augmenting an existing (monolingual) corpus: LibriSpeech. This corpus, used for automatic speech recognition, is derived from read audiobooks from the LibriVox project, and has been carefully segmented and aligned. After gathering French e-books corresponding to the English audio-books from LibriSpeech, we align speech segments at the sentence level with their respective translations and obtain 236h of usable parallel data. This paper presents the details of the processing as well as a manual evaluation conducted on a small subset of the corpus. This evaluation shows that the automatic alignments scores are reasonably correlated with the human judgments of the bilingual alignment quality. We believe that this corpus (which is made available online) is useful for replicable experiments in direct speech translation or more general spoken language translation experiments.Comment: LREC 2018, Japa
    corecore