4 ms·
> Why would I do that? I told you that I found him hard to understand. You disagreed. I suggested one way to get an objective measurement. Maybe there's some
by breck 2y ago
> Why would I do that?
I told you that I found him hard to understand. You disagreed.
I suggested one way to get an objective measurement.
Maybe there's some web app that auto-grades this sort of thing? Like a Grammarly but for audio quality?
I'm not sure. It's an interesting idea.
- 1propionyl 2y agoThat's not an objective measurement of how easy he is to understand for humans. That's a predictive score from a model trained on some set of audio recordings of how likely it would be for it to have produced that audio. This can only possibly be construed as a "measurement" with respect to the model. It's a measure of how the model relates to the input. I'd claim that's not a good proxy for human comprehension at all. In text, it works a good bit better as text data and grammar are far less rich than speech with intonation, accent, cadence, etc.