> But I agree with you that we can get a useful subset of generalization
> from a few thousand examples, provided we have a sane network topology.
> However, that's still a lot.
True, we could possibly make use of a web page to collect training data
though.
> The net is trivially not as general, because with a window, we will
> not be able to generalize beyond the window size.
Ah, I see now, we are talking about different things. You are talking
about using the neural net to detect spelling mistakes, I am talking about
using them to translate words into their 'soundalikes'. At present a very
simple algorithm is used to do this which involves removing vowels and
converting k's to c's or something like that. A neural network should be
able to perform this task much better than this simple algorithm.
> First step is to collect a test body. Then it's easier to see what obvious
> limitations any given net configuration will have.
I agree. I think a webpage is a good way to do this. Does anyone know
whether the hit-rate on the Aspell home page would be sufficient to do
this? Perhaps Rob Malda of SlashDot could direct some hits our way for
this?
Ian.
__________________________________________________________________________
Ian Clarke http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/~iic
`An intellectual is someone who has been educated beyond their
intelligence'
---
Note: This message was origanlly posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
not [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
aspell-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/aspell-user
