Parameterizable Speech Grammar for Secure Voice Recognition

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current speech recognition systems, particularly in VoiceXML, have limited parameterization options for configuring grammars, which restricts the ability to specify complex or custom input constraints, leading to inefficiencies and potential security risks when using scripting engines for semantic interpretation.

Innovation Solution

Implementing parameterizable grammars in a modified SRGS syntax that allows for richer and more complex grammar specifications, enabling the use of parameterized rules without relying on separate scripting engines like ECMAScript or JavaScript, thereby improving runtime performance and reducing latency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If scripting engines (ECMAScript/JavaScript) are used for semantic interpretation, then grammar configuration flexibility is improved, but system security is worsened and runtime performance decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegrammar configuration flexibilityVSAvoidsystem security
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the semantic interpretation functionality from scripting engines and implements it natively within the speech recognition system. By removing the dependency on external scripting engines, the system eliminates security vulnerabilities associated with script execution while maintaining grammar configuration flexibility through built-in parameter handling capabilities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical system of scripting engines with a native parameter-based grammar configuration system. Instead of using ECMAScript/JavaScript for semantic interpretation, the system uses dedicated parameter structures and native processing mechanisms, achieving both improved security and performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Adaptability or versatility

If scripting engines are used for semantic interpretation, then grammar configuration flexibility is improved, but runtime performance is worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegrammar configuration flexibilityVSAvoidruntime performance
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent removes the overhead of scripting engine execution by extracting semantic interpretation to native system processing. This eliminates the performance penalty associated with interpreting scripts at runtime, while grammar flexibility is maintained through parameterized grammar rules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent substitutes the scripting engine execution model with a native parameter processing model. This replacement eliminates the interpretation overhead and achieves faster runtime performance through direct parameter-based grammar matching and semantic interpretation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Device complexity

If limited parameterization options are used in VoiceXML, then system complexity is reduced, but grammar specification capability is worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem complexityVSAvoidgrammar specification capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces dynamic parameterization capabilities that allow grammar specifications to be flexibly configured without increasing overall system complexity. Parameters can be dynamically set and modified, enabling complex grammar patterns while maintaining a clean, manageable system architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extends parameterization options by introducing new parameters for grammar specification. This allows more expressive and flexible grammar definitions through additional parameters such as semantic tags, weights, and constraints, without fundamentally changing the system's core structure or increasing complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP3535752B1System and method for parameterization of speech recognition grammar specification
Publication Date: 2021.09.15 GREENEDEN U S HLDG II LLC
  • EP3535752B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3535752B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3535752B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method includes: loading, by a processor, a grammar specification defining at least one parameterizable grammar including a plurality of rules; setting, by the processor, an initial state of a grammar processor as a current state, the current state including parameters supplied to the rules; selecting, by the processor, a rule of the plurality of rules matching the parameters of the current state of the grammar processor; applying, by the processor, the selected rule to the audio and updating the current state; determining, by the processor, whether termination conditions have been met; in response to determining the termination conditions are not met, selecting, by the processor, from the plurality of rules in accordance with parameters of the updated state; and in response to determining the termination conditions are met, outputting, by the processor, a recognizer result of the current state.