Sample-Efficient ASR Training via Utterance Selection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems require extensive and costly manual annotation of training data, which is resource-intensive and inefficient, especially when updating systems to recognize new or different utterances, leading to high labor expenditures and word-error rates.

Innovation Solution

A sample-efficient annotation and evaluation method that selectively annotates high-value utterances, using a surrogate function to estimate word-error rate and reduce the number of required training samples, thereby improving resource efficiency and accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If a large quantity of training data is used to train ASR systems, then the accuracy and precision of speech recognition is improved, but the labor expenditure and annotation cost increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespeech recognition accuracyVSAvoidtraining data volume
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts and identifies a small subset of high-value training utterances from the overall training data pool. By using importance sampling, the system extracts only the most informative samples that contribute most to reducing word-error rate, rather than using all available training data. This extraction principle directly addresses the contradiction by achieving good recognition accuracy with a much smaller, carefully selected subset of training samples.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by treating different training utterances differently based on their individual value. Instead of uniformly processing all training data, the system assigns different importance weights to different utterances based on their contribution to model improvement. High-value utterances (those with higher importance scores) are selected for annotation and training, while low-value utterances are discarded. This selective approach resolves the contradiction by focusing resources on the most impactful samples.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Measurement precision

If manual annotation of training utterances is performed to improve ASR system accuracy, then the speech recognition quality is improved, but the labor time and resource expenditure increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespeech recognition qualityVSAvoidannotation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts only the most valuable training utterances that need manual annotation. By calculating importance scores for each utterance based on the ASR system's current performance and uncertainty, the system identifies a small subset of high-impact samples. Annotation efforts are concentrated only on these extracted high-value samples rather than annotating all training data, thereby significantly reducing annotation time while maintaining or improving recognition quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a self-service mechanism where the ASR system automatically identifies which utterances would benefit most from annotation. The system uses its own performance metrics (word-error rate, confidence scores) to self-determine the priority of different training samples. This eliminates the need for manual assessment of training data value and automates the selection process, reducing human labor time while improving annotation efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Adaptability or versatility

If ASR systems are re-trained with new training data to recognize new utterances, then the adaptability and recognition capability are improved, but the labor expenditure for annotation increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverecognition capabilityVSAvoidannotation resources
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

When new utterances need to be recognized, the patent extracts only the most informative new training samples rather than annotating all new data. The importance sampling mechanism identifies which new utterances provide the most value for expanding the system's recognition capability. This selective extraction allows the system to adapt to new speech patterns and vocabulary with minimal annotation resources.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by differentiating between various types of new training utterances based on their specific contribution to adaptability. Not all new utterances are equally valuable for improving recognition capability. The system identifies and prioritizes annotation of specific high-value new samples (those with high importance scores) while deprioritizing or skipping low-value new samples, thereby achieving adaptability improvements with reduced annotation resources.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS20240203397A1Systems and methods for improved automatic speech recognition systems
Publication Date: 2024.06.20 COMCAST CABLE COMM LLC
  • US20240203397A1 patent drawing
  • US20240203397A1 patent drawing
  • US20240203397A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Selection of training utterances may be carried out in a sample-efficient manner, and the selected training utterances may be annotated to provide improved training information to an ASR system. A computing device may receive, from an ASR system, one or more transcript-score pairs, wherein a transcript-score pair comprises a transcription associated with a voice query and at least one score associated with the transcription. The computing device may determine a likelihood of a word error associated with each transcription of the one or more transcript-score pairs. The computing device may determine, based on the likelihood of the word error, an effect on a word-error rate of the ASR system. The computing device may send at least one of the one or more transcript-score pairs with a threshold effect on the word-error rate of the ASR system to be annotated.