On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 07:13:43PM +0100, Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals wrote: > It's great to hear that voice recognition in Ubuntu is finally getting some > love :).
> The English Voxforge models are currently packaged in julius-voxforge. > There I did go with the nightly builds there, since in addition to the time > and disk size (which IMHO is already enough of a reason), it needed HTK to > build, which is not redistributable. It'd also be interested in more > opinions though. In terms of freeness of the OS, depending on non-redistributable tools for building the data files is more of an issue than whether we actually process them at package build time. Is this a julius-specific requirement, or does it also affect sphinx? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org > Am Montag, 25. Februar 2013 schrieb Ted Gould : > > > ** > > Howdy, > > > > As some folks may have noticed we're working on a voice input feature in > > HUD. Part of what that requires is acoustic models to be available to > > understand the speech coming in. Currently in Ubuntu there are a couple of > > these, but we need to get to the point of providing for various languages > > and having a way to update these continuously as the data gets better. > > > > So that leads to the question: How do we want these to look in Ubuntu? > > > > The best open source for training data appears to be > > Voxforge<http://www.voxforge.org>, > > a collection of samples based on known text. These samples can then be > > used to compile the acoustical model that the various libraries need. This > > takes significant amounts of CPU time. Their most complete language is > > English, which has about 100 hours of audio, and takes about 10 CPU hours > > to compile the models that Sphinx needs. While English is the most > > complete, I think it's important to realize that the best/worst case > > scenario that supports all languages well could result in easily over a > > thousand hours of CPU time. > > > > So if we think of things in the classic source vs. binary split, it seems > > like the Voxforge data is the source and we should make a source package > > that then builds these binary models. But, at some level, we're just > > exchanging binary data (sound files) for different binary files (acoustic > > models). Would it make more sense to package something like the Voxforge > > nightly > > builds<http://www.repository.voxforge1.org/downloads/Nightly_Builds/>for > > use in Ubuntu? > > > > I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this. I'm leaning towards putting > > the Voxforge data as a source package, as it is our source, but I'm worried > > about the impact it may have on rebuilding the archive.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
