Subject: [Speechsc] Speed-Vs-Accuracy inconsistency with MRCPv2 and VoiceXML 2.0

From: Brett Gavagni <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 11:26:35 -0400

Hi,

Currently there exists some inconsistent interpretation of the values for 
Speed-Vs-Accuracy in the MRCPv2 specification.

The current MRCPv2 draft states the following:
Speed Vs Accuracy 
 
   Depending on the implementation and capability of the recognizer 
   resource it may be tunable towards Performance or Accuracy. Higher 
   accuracy may mean more processing and higher CPU utilization, 
   meaning less calls per server and vice versa. This header is a float 
   value between 0.0 and 1.0 and allows this field to be tuned by the 
   speed-vs-accuracy header. This header field MAY occur in RECOGNIZE, 
   SET-PARAMS or GET-PARAMS. A higher value for this field means higher 
   speed. The default value for this field is platform specific. 
 
     speed-vs-accuracy   =     "Speed-Vs-Accuracy" ":" FLOAT CRLF

The VoiceXML 2.0 specification states the following:
http://www.w3.org/TR/voicexml20/#dml6.3.2
6.3.2 Generic Speech Recognizer Properties 

speedvsaccuracy 
A hint specifying the desired balance between speed vs. accuracy. 
A value of 0.0 means fastest recognition. A value of 1.0 means best 
accuracy. 
The value is a Real Number Designation (see Section 6.5). The default is 
value 0.5.

The VoiceXML spec, states that a 1.0 value means best accuracy, and the 
MRCPv2 draft states that the higher the value means higher speed.

Was it intentional to have the MRCPv2 draft convey an inconsistent 
interpretation of the values in comparison to VoiceXML 2.0?

Thanks,

Brett Gavagni 
WebSphere Voice Server Development 
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/pervasive/voice_server/
(561) 862-2097 T/L (975) 
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Speechsc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speechsc

---

From: David R Oran <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 11:36:47 -0400

> interpretation of the values in comparison to VoiceXML 2.0?
I don't think so. I have no objection to reversing it. Anyone else  
want to chime in?