2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Competing models-based text-prompted speaker independent verification algorithm

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In every test a comparison between the response of a microphone and the throat microphone was made. Of course we had to think about words related to the actions of the device to be controlled (something like "go", or "action") and quite different from each others, so the voice module doesn't get confused ( [22]). …”
Section: The Choice Of the Wordsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In every test a comparison between the response of a microphone and the throat microphone was made. Of course we had to think about words related to the actions of the device to be controlled (something like "go", or "action") and quite different from each others, so the voice module doesn't get confused ( [22]). …”
Section: The Choice Of the Wordsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can identify up to 27 surgical instruments and more than 82 spoken instructions with a recognition rate above 87.7%. A lower rate (80.6%) is achieved in a system concerned with surveillance tasks, 14 or even it is not provided by the authors, as in the work by Glas, 15 where multiple robots are teleoperated in a social fashion. Finally, it must be pointed out that, as in this paper, examples of teleoperation of a robotic platform can also be reported.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%