Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Google Introduces Enhanced Voice Search For iOS & Android Devices

The latest update to Google's voice search includes a text to speech response…

Source 

Google is now making it even easier to search and find the information you need. Today, the company introduced an update to its app for iOS and Android with a fancy new enhanced voice search.

The new voice recognition technology is simple to use. After you’ve updated your Google app, tap the microphone icon and start asking questions. Your words will appear as you speak. If the answer is short, Google will actually tell you the answer aloud.

Google Search Engineer Kenneth Bongort shared the news on the company blog and tips his hat to the “Knowledge Graph” for the ability to be able to do this. Google originally announced the “Knowledge Graph” back in May 2012. It’s an intelligent model that understands real world entities and their relationships to one another. “Things, not strings.”

This is great if you’re driving and need to stay hands free. I’ve had to pull over before to manually type in what I needed. Plus, if you’re not the greatest speller, searching with your voice is ideal.  

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - The latest update to Google's voice search includes a text to speech response… Source  google Google is now making it even easier to search and find the information you need. Today, the company introduced an update to its app for iOS and Android with a fancy new enhanced voice search. The new voice ...

Speech Recognition for the Warehouse

Using speech recognition in he warehouse for voice picking can provide a fantastic ROI.…

Source. google.com

The use of voice technology in the warehouse is expanding, particularly for order picking. Voice directed order picking involves the use of a wearable computer with a headset and microphone. The order pickers are instructed by voice on which items to pick and where to pick them. The pickers then verbally confirm their actions back to the system (WMS) via a radio frequency (RF) and local area network (LAN). The list of potential benefits from using a voice system is impressive:

  • 99.9% plus order accuracy
  • 15% plus increase in productivity over typical bar coding systems
  • Removes trips back to assignment desk
  • Removes cost of printing and distributing picking documents
  • Removes cost of re-keying order amendments, picking confirmations and catch weights
  • Hands free & head down — allows operators to focus on the task
  • Real-time feedback for proactive management
  • Real-time stock updating
  • Improves safety
  • Reduces training — verbal prompts easier
via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - Using speech recognition in he warehouse for voice picking can provide a fantastic ROI.… Source.  google.com The use of voice technology in the warehouse is expanding, particularly for order picking. Voice directed order picking involves the use of a wearable computer with a headset and microphone. ...

Voice search shoot-out: Google’s new voice search vs Apple’s Siri, hands-on

How do the latest assistant releases by Apple and Google compare? John Koetsier puts them them to the test 

Source VentureBeat

Google just released its newest voice search functionality in what VentureBeat’s Ricardo Bilton called a direct assault on Siri, updating both its Android and iOS apps. I wanted to test both of them hands-on.

Siri is an idiot savante, sometimes more savante, and sometimes more idiot: she didn’t know where Washington DC is. Google, on the other hand, seems to have a bigger brain.

Siri does have two advantages. First, she has deep knowledge in a few select areas. And second, she remembers history, so she evaluates current questions in context. (That can be a good thing and a bad thing, as I found when I asked about traffic conditions to Vancouver, BC. I had previously asked about things to do in Vancouver, and to this traffic question Siri told me that the Canucks-Red Wings game had been cancelled.)

Google seems to be smarter, to know more.

Part of that might be because when Google doesn’t have the answer and it defaults to a web search, that seems very normal, versus when Siri defaults to web search (errr … Wolfram Alpha search) it seems like an option of last resort. But part of that is that Google just knows more — its massive knowledge graph is a cumulative result of 15 years of data gained from countless trillions of search queries in an effort to essentially emulate a Star Trek artificial intelligence experience.

Both fared well on some standard factual questions, in a sense. But oddly, Siri picked out the British version of The Office, while Google selected the U.S. version:

Source: John Koetsier

Siri vs Google: the cast of The Office

Another simple one: the time in a different time zone. Both answer correctly, with Siri adding a little more personality, and possibly, the start of a contextual conversation:

Source: John Koetsier

Siri vs Google: the time somewhere else

Google, with the wealth of data riding on its shoulders, is fairly confident when it gives you results. The results may sometimes not be extremely helpful, though they usually are, but they are always delivered definitively.

Siri, on the other hand, is sort of like an unsure teenager, who ends every sentence trailing up in tone, transmuting statements into questions. When Siri isn’t sure, she checks Wolfram Alpha and gives you an answer with a conditional: this “might” answer your question:

Source: John Koetsier

What is a curveball? Both have the answer, though Siri’s not too sure …

In other cases, Siri is more idiot than savante, it must be said. For instance, any app purporting to help users search and navigate the world of information should know what Washington DC is, and how to find it.

Google does, and provides a map with directions. Siri, unfortunately, is painfully clueless:

Source: John Koetsier

How could you not know where Washington, DC is, Siri?

Siri’s lack of real, deep knowledge about the world is evident in other typically search-engine-style questions about companies and people.

In this case, Siri does not know who the CEO of Apple is, and rather schoolmarmishly tells me that everything I need to know about Apple is at Apple’s website. (As a journalist who focuses on Apple coverage, I just might beg to differ a little.)

Source: John Koetsier

Siri, you should really know the CEO of the company you work for …

But in areas where Siri has been directly connected to a deep source of specific data on a certain set of questions, she shines, giving detailed, information-rich, even visual answers.

Such as stock quotes:

Source: John Koetsier

A little insider tip, please …

That includes Yelp-assisted categories such as local search, where Siri has access to rich and detailed information on local restaurants, events, and entertainment. Google, on the other hand, is unhelpfully responding to a search by giving me more search options to continue search in. Sorry, I’m searching to find, not searching to search.

(Note the vestiges of skeuomorphic design in Siri’s answer.)

Source: John Koetsier

Thanks for giving me search engines in response to a search, Google

One key difference where Siri has the potential to shine: context. Siri knows what you’ve just asked, and so you can build a chain of searches and steps to accomplish a task.

For example, you can ask Siri to send an email, and she’ll ask for the name of the recipient, and, in a subsequent step, the message itself, meaning that you can accomplish a complex series of actions without feeling like you need to do it all at once. Google can’t help you at all with those sorts of tasks at the moment, although apps like Edwin, Vlingo, Speaktoit, and Samsung’s S Voice can accomplish various parts of what Siri does.

In search, context helps too (even if Siri doesn’t always do the right thing with it):

Source: John Koetsier

Context helps … but that’s not the Four Seasons I was thinking of

This is of course not an exhaustive list … but it does highlight some of the differences.

Based on the results, and my preconceptions and prejudices, if I had to pick a personal assistant to help me do things on my phone, I’d pick Siri, of course. But if I had to pick one app for web search and information retrieval, I’d have to go with Google.

And frankly, given the data that Google has at its disposal, it’s hard to see how Apple can win this one.

I think if Apple was completely cold-blooded and logical about this, they’d partner with Google for search results in Siri, not Wofram Alpha, and they’d focus Apple-specific Siri enhancements on strong vertical partnerships with services like Yelp and OpenTable and airline reservations, as well as specifically phone control tasks.

That would, of course, be a seriously naive strategy. Which doesn’t mean it would be wrong.

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - How do the latest assistant releases by Apple and Google compare?  John Koetsier puts them them to the test   Source  VentureBeat Google just released its newest voice search functionality  in what VentureBeat’s Ricardo Bilton called a direct assault on Siri , updating both its Android and iOS apps. ...

Friday, October 26, 2012

IVRs without Frustration: Speech Recognition Gets the Human Touch

Here's a way you can achieve 100% accuracy without touchtone technology by allowing the caller to speak to your IVR. It's a mix of speech recognition and agent assisted IVR technology.


Source: google.com

If you’ve ever used an interactive voice response (IVR) system – and unless you’ve been living on a desert island, you have – you’ll know that there are some truly bad systems out there. The earliest voice-driven IVRs that used speech recognition often required users to shout into the telephone, repeating themselves until they nearly spontaneously combusted in frustration when the system returned the message, “I didn’t understand your response” for the sixth time.

Luckily, the technology has come a long way.

Once upon a time, the number of response combinations that the systems could understand were very limited, which is why it had to restrict your responses (“say ‘one’ for the customer service department” instead of simply asking you to describe what you’re looking for in natural language). Those days are nearly behind us, thanks to newer solutions offered by companies such as Massachusetts-based Interactions, which offers a conversational natural language solution that allows people to speak to computers as if they were live agents.

Speech Technology Group (www.speechtechnologygroup.com) offers an agent assisted IVR system, that works in conjunction with the powerful Microsoft speech engine. The combination of the two offers the highest accuracy and extraordinary value.

Interactions’ solution leverages a combination of automated speech recognition (ASR) and what the company calls “human assisted understanding” (HAU). HAU improves accuracy and natural-language understanding by supplementing speech recognition when it can’t perform. In traditional speech-recognition applications, all requests get routed directly to an ASR engine. When the engine can’t recognize something, it keeps re-prompting the caller, or eventually gives up and transfers the call to a live agent. This limitation causes poor application design and performance – and frustrates callers. Interactions says it has overcome this application-design limitation.

Rachel Metz of MIT (News - Alert) Technology Review says it’s about more than simply routing calls with less frustration.

“Interactions’ software is, hopefully, more than a solution to impossibly annoying automated support systems,” writes Metz. “It’s also an example of software and human intelligence working together. Rather than relying entirely on software to handle calls, Interactions automatically hands speech that its software can’t cope with over to human agents, who select an appropriate response.”

Who would have thought that humans interacting vocally with computers could be a source of anything but a nervous breakdown?

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - Here's a way you can achieve 100% accuracy without touchtone technology by allowing the caller to speak to your IVR. It's a mix of speech recognition and agent assisted IVR technology. Source:  google.com If you’ve ever used an interactive voice response (IVR) system – and unless you’ve been living ...

Friday, October 19, 2012

Maccessibility » Apple looking to add individual personality to text-to-speech voices

Here is a way to make text to speech technology even more appealing:


Source: google.com

The filing, titled “Voice assignment for text-to-speech output,” looks to create “speaker profiles” which can change the voice characteristics of TTS output to match parsed-out metadata like age, sex, dialect and other variables.

As noted by the application, many systems exist today to aid the visually impaired, including the system on Apple’s iPhone, however most TTS engines “generate synthesized speech having voice characteristics of either a male speaker or a female speaker. Regardless of the gender of the speaker, the same voice is used for all text-to-speech conversion regardless of the source of the text being converted.” Apple’s invention proposes a different solution.

This is a great read, and a fascinating concept. I was very skeptical as I started reading this piece, but as I understood all the nuances of the invention, (pun intended), I found myself nodding. This could be an excellent advancement for TTS.

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - Here is a way to make text to speech technology even more appealing: Source:  google.com The filing, titled “Voice assignment for text-to-speech output,” looks to create “speaker profiles” which can change the voice characteristics of TTS output to match parsed-out metadata like age, sex, dialect an ...

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Google’s Search Lead Can Become Apple’s Advantage In 5 Years

Will the upcoming battle for search be fought with voice recognition technology?

Source. google.com

Many seem to believe that it is a foregone conclusion that Google has already won the search engine wars. After all Google currently holds 66.7% of the U.S. search market as of September 2012, with its closest competitor, Microsoft (MSFT), at a distant 15.9% and Yahoo (YHOO) at 12.2%. Furthermore, Google currently generates about 96% of its revenues from advertising driven by its search engine.

There has been a lot of focus recently on Facebook’s (FB) challenges in monetizing ad revenues as consumers shift to smartphones. The challenge rests with the diminishing screen size; as the screen size of a smartphone is considerably smaller than the screen size of a desktop or laptop, then the number of advertisements that can be displayed is more limited. Such consumer transition to a smaller screen is likely to affect display advertisements more than paid search advertisements, although it will still have some negative effect; hence it seems Google is better positioned to weather such transition than Facebook.

What if the screen size went to zero? How can the screen size go to zero? Voice recognition. Although in reality the screen is still there, when a user dictates his query and the phone provides an answer through its own voice, as Apple’s Siri does, then the user is less likely to look at the screen. This will undoubtedly present a challenge to Google. Consumers may be fine being visually exposed to no less than ten search results on their screen, but it is less comfortable for consumers to actually listen to no less than ten possible answers to their questions.

It is important to note that Siri at this time is not a fully fledged search engine. As a matter of a fact Siri can be instructed to use Google, Bing or Yahoo in retrieving its results. Furthermore, Google has also developed its own voice powered search for iOS. However, Apple will always retain the upper hand, as it has been pointed out by Daniel Eran Dilger of Apple Insider:

Apple previously held up approval of Google Voice for over a year, and kept Google’s Latitude friend finder app in limbo for two years as it considered the features. This left Google to rely upon web app alternatives to native titles in the App Store.

Apple currently generates most of its revenues from sales of its products and services, with minimal advertisement revenues. During the next five years, it is very likely that Apple will try to take a bite out of Google by targeting the paid search market through Siri. As a matter of a fact, if Apple simply succeeds at becoming less dependent on Google in the search market, without a noticeable decline in user experience, then it would consider such efforts well worth it. To such effect, Apple has recently announced the hiring of William Stasior, previously in charge of Amazon’s A9 search engine, hence paving the way for further incursion into the search engine market.

During the next five years, the battle for search engine market share will be fought in the voice recognition arena, where Apple currently has advantages through its iPhone market penetration and Siri. Furthermore, given Google’s current dominant search market share of over two-thirds, such battle can only present downside risk potential for Google, while Apple has a potential upside. To conclude this article on the light side, such search engine wars will not be as entertaining as the Google-MSN-Yahoo search engine rap battles in this video.

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - Will the upcoming battle for search be fought with voice recognition technology? Source.  google.com Many seem to believe that it is a foregone conclusion that Google has already won the search engine wars. After all Google currently holds 66.7% of the U.S. search market as of September 2012, with i ...

Saturday, October 13, 2012

((delay: in 8 hoursThe Biggest Threat To Apple Right Now

Apple's reliance on third parties for critical applications - a growing concern and challenge to keep the competitive advantage…


red tim cook

In July, we wrote that we were blown away with Google Now, the voice-controlled search service on the newest version of Android. The app is Google’s answer to Siri.

Except it’s better. Unlike Siri, Google Now can tap into Google’s search engine and return better results. Unlike Siri, Google Now is a finished product that just works. And unlike Siri, Google Now is actually useful and accurate.

Then there’s the whole Apple Maps debacle, which spurred a humble apology from Tim Cook and a new section in Apple’s App Store for alternative mapping apps. Without beating a dead horse, let’s just say Apple Maps are pretty awful, sometimes hilariously so.

There’s a pattern developing here.

Whenever Apple attempts a data-driven service like Siri or maps, it fails miserably. Both those services rely on a bunch of third parties like Wolfram Alpha or Yahoo (for Siri) and Waze, TomTom, or Yelp (for Maps). The results are two shaky products that can’t get you what you need the way Google can. When Apple cuts out Google, things get worse.

The New York Times touched on the subject last week when it wrote about Cook’s apology for Maps. One nugget in the story really stuck out:

The company’s weakness in this area could become a bigger problem over time as smartphones become more intimately tied to information and software on the Internet — a field where Google, which makes the competing Android phone software, has the home-turf advantage.

The article goes on to mention Ping and MobileMe as other Apple failures, but those are different. MobileMe was a way to sync contacts and email between your PC, the Web, and iPhone or iPad. Ping was a social network baked into iTunes. Neither were products that rely on massive amounts of data like Maps and Siri do now.

And that’s where things look scary for Apple. Products like MobileMe can be tweaked and fixed. (MobileMe wasn’t that bad to begin with, but iCloud is definitely an improvement.) But if you don’t have a ton of data for services like Siri and maps, there’s nothing you can do. The product is only as good as the data you have.

This is the biggest problem with Apple cutting out all things Google from the iPhone. Google has had years to collect massive amounts of data from its users. As a hardware company, Apple has to hope others have the data it needs. Until recently, it relied on Google for that. Now its trying it’s luck with other companies. That’s not working.

What’s really worrisome is that Apple could take its battle with Google a step further and get into the search business, removing Google as the default engine on iPhones and iPads. It’s not very likely to happen, but there have been talks of Apple trying search since before it bought Siri a few years ago. If Apple really is trying to destroy Google, then don’t be surprised if search is its next target.

It’s a disaster waiting to happen.

via http://www.speechtechnologygroup.com/speech-blog - Apple's reliance on third parties for critical applications - a growing concern and challenge to keep the competitive advantage… Source   Business Insider  In July, we wrote that we were  blown away with Google Now , the voice-controlled search service on the newest version of Android . The app is G ...