Voice-processing technologies--their application in telecommunications.

As the telecommunications industry evolves over the next decade to provide the products and services that people will desire, several key technologies will become commonplace. Two of these, automatic speech recognition and text-to-speech synthesis, will provide users with more freedom on when, where, and how they access information. While these technologies are currently in their infancy, their capabilities are rapidly increasing and their deployment in today's telephone network is expanding. The economic impact of just one application, the automation of operator services, is well over $100 million per year. Yet there still are many technical challenges that must be resolved before these technologies can be deployed ubiquitously in products and services throughout the worldwide telephone network. These challenges include: (i) High level of accuracy. The technology must be perceived by the user as highly accurate, robust, and reliable. (ii) Easy to use. Speech is only one of several possible input/output modalities for conveying information between a human and a machine, much like a computer terminal or Touch-Tone pad on a telephone. It is not the final product. Therefore, speech technologies must be hidden from the user. That is, the burden of using the technology must be on the technology itself. (iii) Quick prototyping and development of new products and services. The technology must support the creation of new products and services based on speech in an efficient and timely fashion. In this paper I present a vision of the voice-processing industry with a focus on the areas with the broadest base of user penetration: speech recognition, text-to-speech synthesis, natural language processing, and speaker recognition technologies. The current and future applications of these technologies in the telecommunications industry will be examined in terms of their strengths, limitations, and the degree to which user needs have been or have yet to be met. Although noteworthy gains have been made in areas with potentially small user bases and in the more mature speech-coding technologies, these subjects are outside the scope of this paper.

Measuring science: An exploration

This paper examines the available United States data on academic research and development (R&D) expenditures and the number of papers published and the number of citations to these papers as possible measures of “output” of this enterprise. We look at these numbers for science and engineering as a whole, for five selected major fields, and at the individual university field level. The published data in Science and Engineering Indicators imply sharply diminishing returns to academic R&D using published papers as an “output” measure. These data are quite problematic. Using a newer set of data on papers and citations, based on an “expanding” set of journals and the newly released Bureau of Economic Analysis R&D deflators, changes the picture drastically, eliminating the appearance of diminishing returns but raising the question of why the input prices of academic R&D are rising so much faster than either the gross domestic product deflator or the implicit R&D deflator in industry. A production function analysis of such data at the individual field level follows. It indicates significant diminishing returns to “own” R&D, with the R&D coefficients hovering around 0.5 for estimates with paper numbers as the dependent variable and around 0.6 if total citations are used as the dependent variable. When we substitute scientists and engineers in place of R&D as the right-hand side variables, the coefficient on papers rises from 0.5 to 0.8, and the coefficient on citations rises from 0.6 to 0.9, indicating systematic measurement problems with R&D as the sole input into the production of scientific output. But allowing for individual university field effects drives these numbers down significantly below unity. Because in the aggregate both paper numbers and citations are growing as fast or faster than R&D, this finding can be interpreted as leaving a major, yet unmeasured, role for the contribution of spillovers from other fields, other universities, and other countries.