Conclusions
Next: Suggestions for further work
Up: Conclusion
Previous: Conclusion
From the results of the experiments described in the previous chapter,
we can draw the following conclusions.
- Combined optimization of HMMs, together with probability
calculation and Pre-Processing Neural Nets, is feasible. This means
that system converges to a local minimum of the error surface
without diverging or oscillating.
- As a basic rule, systems with larger number of free parameters
have inferior generalization ability than those with lesser number
of free parameters. That is, the difference in recognition rates for
training and testing is larger, for the systems with larger number
of free parameters.
- Adaptive pre-processing can lead to better system performances
both in training and testing, than non-adaptive or classical
pre-processing does. However if the adaptive pre-processing
introduces a large number of free parameters to the system, then the
generalization ability of the system can be degraded.
- Same effect of adaptive pre-processing cannot be achieved by
increasing the neurons or the layers of the system with a fixed
pre-processing part. This means that adaptive pre-processing is
un-substitutable.
- Existence of a recurrent loop can enhance the recognition rates.
However it is most effective when placed with in the adaptive
pre-processing stage. If it is placed at a point after a fixed
pre-processing part , then there may be the cases where the system
performances can become even poorer.
- In the case of fixed pre-processing, Fourier transform gives
better results than Hartley transform does. The reason may be the
higher shift invariance associated with the Fourier transform.
- Adaptation of the filter bank alone, can give comparable results
with those obtained by adaptation of both filter bank and Hartley
transform
- Simultaneous adaptation of Hartley frequency or time indexes
with Gaussian shaped filter bank does not lead to a system which
converges. Even though a converging system can be obtained by
replacing Gaussian filter bank with a rotated version of it, and by
letting the Hartley time indexes adapt, the performances are not
comparable with the best results obtained otherwise.
- The system with an adaptive pre-processing part and a recurrent
loop is the best, on the basis of recognition rates achieved both
in training and testing. And the worst system is the one which has a
Hartley transform based fixed pre-processing.
- A hybrid HMM-ANN system with NN based pre-processing can give
very good recognition performances and there is a big potential for
further improvements
Next: Suggestions for further work
Up: Conclusion
Previous: Conclusion
Narada Warakagoda
Fri May 10 20:35:10 MET DST 1996
Home Page