From blangner+ at cs.cmu.edu Tue Jan 6 13:10:08 2009 From: blangner+ at cs.cmu.edu (Brian Langner) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:10:08 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 74]: Re: Trac.speech is Online In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49639E80.10308@cs.cmu.edu> Benjamin Frisch wrote: > Hi, > Trac.speech is now fixed and back online. More work will have to be done > in January 2009 to make sure the cause of the downtime is fully fixed, so > expect minor downtime during January. > Is this diagnosis/repair started? httpd on trac seems not to be running (though the machine is probably up since it's responding to pings)... From bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu Tue Jan 6 14:33:07 2009 From: bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu (Benjamin Frisch) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:33:07 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 75]: Re: Trac.speech is Online In-Reply-To: <49639E80.10308@cs.cmu.edu> References: <49639E80.10308@cs.cmu.edu> Message-ID: Hi, Sorry for the trouble. The HTTPd on Trac is now running. Expect the repair to start early next week. I will let you know before hand if there is going to be any downtime. Ben Frisch On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Brian Langner > wrote: > Benjamin Frisch wrote: > >> Hi, >> Trac.speech is now fixed and back online. More work will have to be done >> in January 2009 to make sure the cause of the downtime is fully fixed, so >> expect minor downtime during January. >> >> > Is this diagnosis/repair started? httpd on trac seems not to be running > (though the machine is probably up since it's responding to pings)... > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090106/e17107c7/attachment.html From Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com Fri Jan 9 07:38:09 2009 From: Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com (Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 18:08:09 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Message-ID: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Hi, Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built based on this framework. Thanking you. Regards, Chandrakanth. ________________________________ DISCLAIMER: This email may contain confidential information and is intended only for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com and delete the original message. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090109/1ee3c193/attachment.html From antoine.raux at polytechnique.org Fri Jan 9 19:55:49 2009 From: antoine.raux at polytechnique.org (Antoine Raux) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:55:49 -0800 Subject: [Olympus developers 77]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Message-ID: <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi Chandrakanth, Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful configurations would probably work too). Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own experience... antoine On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: > Hi, > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. > Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built > based on this framework. > > Thanking you. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > DISCLAIMER: > > This email may contain confidential information and is intended only > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this > email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately > notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > and delete the original message. From tkharris at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 22:34:22 2009 From: tkharris at gmail.com (Thomas Harris) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:34:22 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 78]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <76c228b0901091934s1c69bfcw7f37beffcca5ff39@mail.gmail.com> I just ran MeetinLine today and it was using between 100-200MB. It seemed like the process monitor was using most of the memory. Might be something to address. -Thomas On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Antoine Raux wrote: > Hi Chandrakanth, > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are > running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > configurations would probably work too). > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own > experience... > > antoine > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: >> Hi, >> Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any >> application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. >> Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built >> based on this framework. >> >> Thanking you. >> >> Regards, >> Chandrakanth. >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> DISCLAIMER: >> >> This email may contain confidential information and is intended only >> for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If >> you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby >> notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this >> email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly >> prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately >> notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com >> and delete the original message. > > > From Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com Mon Jan 12 01:55:27 2009 From: Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com (Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:25:27 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 79]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <76c228b0901091934s1c69bfcw7f37beffcca5ff39@mail.gmail.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>, <76c228b0901091934s1c69bfcw7f37beffcca5ff39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711B@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Thomas, Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key challenges that will come across to develop similar kind of system in handheld devices. Regards, Chandrakanth. ________________________________________ From: Thomas Harris [tkharris at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:04 AM To: Antoine Raux Cc: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula; olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 77]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework I just ran MeetinLine today and it was using between 100-200MB. It seemed like the process monitor was using most of the memory. Might be something to address. -Thomas On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Antoine Raux wrote: > Hi Chandrakanth, > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are > running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > configurations would probably work too). > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own > experience... > > antoine > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: >> Hi, >> Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any >> application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. >> Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built >> based on this framework. >> >> Thanking you. >> >> Regards, >> Chandrakanth. >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> DISCLAIMER: >> >> This email may contain confidential information and is intended only >> for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If >> you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby >> notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this >> email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly >> prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately >> notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com >> and delete the original message. > > > From Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com Mon Jan 12 01:57:45 2009 From: Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com (Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:27:45 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 80]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com>, <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Antoine, Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key challenges that will come across to develop similar kind of system in handheld devices. Regards, Chandrakanth. ________________________________________ From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:25 AM To: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula Cc: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework Hi Chandrakanth, Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful configurations would probably work too). Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own experience... antoine On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: > Hi, > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. > Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built > based on this framework. > > Thanking you. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > DISCLAIMER: > > This email may contain confidential information and is intended only > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this > email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately > notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > and delete the original message. From tkharris at gmail.com Mon Jan 12 09:08:07 2009 From: tkharris at gmail.com (Thomas Harris) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:08:07 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 81]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Message-ID: <76c228b0901120608i225217av7a59e3823f3522f4@mail.gmail.com> Fortunately, PocketSphinx and Flight both have integer-only modes, so you can manage without a floating-point unit if you need to. -Thomas On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula < Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com> wrote: > Antoine, > > Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key challenges > that will come across to develop similar kind of system in handheld devices. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > ________________________________________ > From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:25 AM > To: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > Cc: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu > Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of ravenclaw > framework > > Hi Chandrakanth, > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are > running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > configurations would probably work too). > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own > experience... > > antoine > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: > > Hi, > > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any > > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. > > Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built > > based on this framework. > > > > Thanking you. > > > > Regards, > > Chandrakanth. > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > DISCLAIMER: > > > > This email may contain confidential information and is intended only > > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If > > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby > > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this > > email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly > > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately > > notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > > and delete the original message. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090112/34eaf055/attachment.html From antoine.raux at polytechnique.org Mon Jan 12 13:47:12 2009 From: antoine.raux at polytechnique.org (Antoine Raux) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:47:12 -0800 Subject: [Olympus developers 82]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <76c228b0901091934s1c69bfcw7f37beffcca5ff39@mail.gmail.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <76c228b0901091934s1c69bfcw7f37beffcca5ff39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1231786032.3726.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Indeed, it's time someone took a hard look at memory use and performance in Pythia (I assume that's the process monitor you're referring to Thomas). The CPU overhead that I noticed a while ago (which prompted me to revert to the old process monitor for my experiments with Let's Go) and this memory usage are probably related... antoine On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 22:34 -0500, Thomas Harris wrote: > I just ran MeetinLine today and it was using between 100-200MB. It > seemed like the process monitor was using most of the memory. Might be > something to address. > > -Thomas > > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Antoine Raux > wrote: > > Hi Chandrakanth, > > > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure of the > > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU and do > > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that we are > > running the full Let's Go system (including speech recognition, > > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single PC (3GHz > > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > > configurations would probably work too). > > > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their own > > experience... > > > > antoine > > > > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula wrote: > >> Hi, > >> Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print of any > >> application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog framework. > >> Speed requirement of any processor required to run application built > >> based on this framework. > >> > >> Thanking you. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Chandrakanth. > >> > >> > >> > >> ______________________________________________________________________ > >> DISCLAIMER: > >> > >> This email may contain confidential information and is intended only > >> for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is addressed. If > >> you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby > >> notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this > >> email or the information contained in it or attached to it is strictly > >> prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately > >> notify the sender at Infotech or Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > >> and delete the original message. > > > > > > > From antoine.raux at polytechnique.org Mon Jan 12 13:52:16 2009 From: antoine.raux at polytechnique.org (Antoine Raux) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:52:16 -0800 Subject: [Olympus developers 83]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <76c228b0901120608i225217av7a59e3823f3522f4@mail.gmail.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <76c228b0901120608i225217av7a59e3823f3522f4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1231786336.3726.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> Yes, PocketSphinx and Flite are both designed to work on handheld devices (hence the "Pocket" in PocketSphinx and the "lite" in Flite). Now this is not the case for the rest of Olympus (parser, dialog manager, natural language generation, and last but not least, Galaxy Hub). My guess is that you'd have to find (or create) a lightweight alternative to Galaxy (to let your modules talk to each other), and at least a new version of RavenClaw, which is really not optimized for performance (or memory usage). Now depending on your application, you might not need all the bells and whistles of RavenClaw (and god knows there are quite a few), so if you can get away with a much simpler dialog manager (in which case, NLU and NLG should not be a problem either), I assume you'd be able to fit a whole system on a (reasonably powerful) handheld device. antoine On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:08 -0500, Thomas Harris wrote: > Fortunately, PocketSphinx and Flight both have integer-only modes, so > you can manage without a floating-point unit if you need to. > > -Thomas > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > wrote: > Antoine, > > Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key > challenges that will come across to develop similar kind of > system in handheld devices. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > ________________________________________ > > From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:25 AM > To: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > Cc: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu > Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of > ravenclaw framework > > > Hi Chandrakanth, > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure > of the > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU > and do > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that > we are > running the full Let's Go system (including speech > recognition, > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single > PC (3GHz > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > configurations would probably work too). > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their > own > experience... > > antoine > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print > of any > > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog > framework. > > Speed requirement of any processor required to run > application built > > based on this framework. > > > > Thanking you. > > > > Regards, > > Chandrakanth. > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > DISCLAIMER: > > > > This email may contain confidential information and is > intended only > > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is > addressed. If > > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are > hereby > > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying > of this > > email or the information contained in it or attached to it > is strictly > > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please > immediately > > notify the sender at Infotech or > Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > > and delete the original message. > > > From chandrakanth.vnr at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 03:53:48 2009 From: chandrakanth.vnr at gmail.com (chandrakanth reddy dargula) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:23:48 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 84]: Reg olympus dialog management framework Message-ID: <62970f680901140053n20d91e6mcc2826ae26bfd76a@mail.gmail.com> Hi, My self Chandrakanth working as software engineer in embedded domain and intrested in contributing to the open source olympus dialog management framework. I am a rookie to this framework. Could you please let me know what are the key challenges still present in this framework and which are i can concentrate to contribute to this framework. Could please also let me is there any research or development going on to develop similar kind of framework for handheld devices(embedded applications). If it is already started what are key challenges which still needs to be addressed for the same. Regards, Chandrakanth. From Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com Thu Jan 15 07:35:41 2009 From: Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com (Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:05:41 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 85]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <1231786336.3726.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <76c228b0901120608i225217av7a59e3823f3522f4@mail.gmail.com>, <1231786336.3726.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7127@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Hi, I am software engineer in embedded domain and interested in contributing to the open source olympus dialog management framework. I am a rookie to this framework. Could you please let me know what are the key challenges still present in this framework and which are i can concentrate to contribute to this framework. Could please also let me is there any research or development going on to develop similar kind of framework for handheld devices(embedded applications). If it is already started what are key challenges which still needs to be addressed for the same. Regards, Chandrakanth. ________________________________________ From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:22 AM To: Thomas Harris Cc: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula; olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 81]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework Yes, PocketSphinx and Flite are both designed to work on handheld devices (hence the "Pocket" in PocketSphinx and the "lite" in Flite). Now this is not the case for the rest of Olympus (parser, dialog manager, natural language generation, and last but not least, Galaxy Hub). My guess is that you'd have to find (or create) a lightweight alternative to Galaxy (to let your modules talk to each other), and at least a new version of RavenClaw, which is really not optimized for performance (or memory usage). Now depending on your application, you might not need all the bells and whistles of RavenClaw (and god knows there are quite a few), so if you can get away with a much simpler dialog manager (in which case, NLU and NLG should not be a problem either), I assume you'd be able to fit a whole system on a (reasonably powerful) handheld device. antoine On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:08 -0500, Thomas Harris wrote: > Fortunately, PocketSphinx and Flight both have integer-only modes, so > you can manage without a floating-point unit if you need to. > > -Thomas > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > wrote: > Antoine, > > Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key > challenges that will come across to develop similar kind of > system in handheld devices. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > ________________________________________ > > From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:25 AM > To: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > Cc: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu > Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of > ravenclaw framework > > > Hi Chandrakanth, > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure > of the > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU > and do > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that > we are > running the full Let's Go system (including speech > recognition, > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single > PC (3GHz > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > configurations would probably work too). > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their > own > experience... > > antoine > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print > of any > > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog > framework. > > Speed requirement of any processor required to run > application built > > based on this framework. > > > > Thanking you. > > > > Regards, > > Chandrakanth. > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > DISCLAIMER: > > > > This email may contain confidential information and is > intended only > > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is > addressed. If > > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are > hereby > > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying > of this > > email or the information contained in it or attached to it > is strictly > > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please > immediately > > notify the sender at Infotech or > Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > > and delete the original message. > > > From bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu Fri Jan 16 02:08:39 2009 From: bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu (Benjamin Frisch) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:08:39 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 86]: Fwd: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw framework In-Reply-To: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7127@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> References: <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A710F@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7114@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <1231548949.3726.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A711C@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> <76c228b0901120608i225217av7a59e3823f3522f4@mail.gmail.com> <1231786336.3726.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35C441B771948A4C96E06C69B8B57A5656CF8A7127@INFHYDEXMB.corp.infotech-enterprises.com> Message-ID: Hi, The two key challenges, in my opinion, for an embedded version of the framework as it is in its current state of development is the reliance of Windows Threading API's for in process threading, and the 10+ network ports needed for inter-process communication (which is primarily due to the use of the Galaxy Communicator). There is work in progress by myself to make the Olympus architecture build on Unix based Operating Systems, but there is no work to replace the Galaxy Communicator with a version that uses Kernel level inter-process communication nor is there an effort to create a single executable version of Olympus to the best of my knowledge. We would accept contributions addressing both of the key challenges. (E-mail me personally with your preferred user name and password for filing bugs and committing, and I will get you setup to submit patches (that someone will checkin after review) through "bug" reports on http://trac.speech.cs.cmu.edu/olympus , and I will find out the policy about if and when to give commit access if possible.) In general, as mentioned earlier, our text to speech synthesizer library and our speech decoder library are both optimized for embedded systems already, but the rest of the system is not; however, while we primarily run the system on powerful machines, the system is usable and responsive on our less powerful development machines (which usually have around a 2 GHz P4 and 1 GB RAM). Both the replacement of the Window's Threading API's (especially if the embedded device will not run Windows Mobile/CE) and the Galaxy Communicator would significantly help the system work well in an embedded domain. I will be sending out an e-mail shortly about a meeting to discuss progress on the Unix conversion, and you could join remotely if you can. Of course, from the prospective of the system in general RavenClaw, Apollo etc. both contain code for states that are rarely used and could probably also be replaced with something more light-weight or have some states/code not compiled. I also understand that language processing is heavily reliant on preprocessor variables and logic written for the specific processing in C, and that could be probably be improved as well. I will talk to other developers tomorrow and get their opinions as well. Thanks, Benjamin Frisch Undergraduate Research Assitant On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula < Chandrakanth.Dargula at infotech-enterprises.com> wrote: > Hi, > I am software engineer in embedded domain > and interested in contributing to the open source olympus dialog > management framework. I am a rookie to this framework. Could you > please let me know what are the key challenges still present in this > framework and which are i can concentrate to contribute to this > framework. > Could please also let me is there any research or development going on > to develop similar kind of framework for handheld devices(embedded > applications). If it is already started what are key challenges which > still needs to be addressed for the same. > > Regards, > Chandrakanth. > ________________________________________ > From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:22 AM > To: Thomas Harris > Cc: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula; olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu > Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 81]: Re: memory footprint of ravenclaw > framework > > Yes, PocketSphinx and Flite are both designed to work on handheld > devices (hence the "Pocket" in PocketSphinx and the "lite" in Flite). > > Now this is not the case for the rest of Olympus (parser, dialog > manager, natural language generation, and last but not least, Galaxy > Hub). > > My guess is that you'd have to find (or create) a lightweight > alternative to Galaxy (to let your modules talk to each other), and at > least a new version of RavenClaw, which is really not optimized for > performance (or memory usage). Now depending on your application, you > might not need all the bells and whistles of RavenClaw (and god knows > there are quite a few), so if you can get away with a much simpler > dialog manager (in which case, NLU and NLG should not be a problem > either), I assume you'd be able to fit a whole system on a (reasonably > powerful) handheld device. > > antoine > > > On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:08 -0500, Thomas Harris wrote: > > Fortunately, PocketSphinx and Flight both have integer-only modes, so > > you can manage without a floating-point unit if you need to. > > > > -Thomas > > > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > > wrote: > > Antoine, > > > > Thanks for your inputs. Could any one let me know what are key > > challenges that will come across to develop similar kind of > > system in handheld devices. > > > > Regards, > > Chandrakanth. > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: Antoine Raux [antoine.raux at polytechnique.org] > > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:25 AM > > To: Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > > Cc: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu > > Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 76]: memory footprint of > > ravenclaw framework > > > > > > Hi Chandrakanth, > > > > Thank you for your interest in Olympus. I'm not exactly sure > > of the > > memory footprint of Olympus applications (I'm no longer at CMU > > and do > > not have an Olympus set up at hand to check) but I know that > > we are > > running the full Let's Go system (including speech > > recognition, > > synthesis, interaction and dialog management, etc) on a single > > PC (3GHz > > dual-core with 4GB of memory, although slightly less powerful > > configurations would probably work too). > > > > Hope this helps a bit... If anyone else cares to share their > > own > > experience... > > > > antoine > > > > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:08 +0530, Chandrakanth Reddy Dargula > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > Could you please let me know approximate memory foot print > > of any > > > application developed using this olympus/ravenclaw dialog > > framework. > > > Speed requirement of any processor required to run > > application built > > > based on this framework. > > > > > > Thanking you. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Chandrakanth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > DISCLAIMER: > > > > > > This email may contain confidential information and is > > intended only > > > for the use of the specific individual(s) to which it is > > addressed. If > > > you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are > > hereby > > > notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying > > of this > > > email or the information contained in it or attached to it > > is strictly > > > prohibited. If you received this message in error, please > > immediately > > > notify the sender at Infotech or > > Mail.Admin at infotech-enterprises.com > > > and delete the original message. > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090116/b26f67c9/attachment-0001.html From bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu Fri Jan 16 02:13:55 2009 From: bfrisch at cs.cmu.edu (Benjamin Frisch) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:13:55 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 87]: Olympus *nix Conversion Meeting Friday Message-ID: Hi All, I would like to have a meeting in CMU's Wean Hall Room 3123A at 3:30 PM US Eastern Time for about 1 to 2 hours to discuss the status of the *nix Olympus Conversion and the new CMake only Olympus Build system. If you are interested and 3:30 PM doesn't work for you and/or you would like to join the meeting remotely, let me know. Thanks, Benjamin Frisch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090116/3cbe67f8/attachment.html From inderjeetworld at gmail.com Wed Jan 21 05:38:42 2009 From: inderjeetworld at gmail.com (inderjeet kaur) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:08:42 +0530 Subject: [Olympus developers 88]: Regarding Olympus example system Message-ID: Dear Sir/Madam, I m getting some error message while i am trying to acces the example system from the site http://trac.speech.cs.cmu.edu/repos/olympus/example-systems/ .I am using TortoiseSVN and its giving error message OPTIONS of ' http://trac.speech.cs.cmu.edu/repos/olympus': could not connect to server ( http://trac.speech.cs.cmu.edu).can to provide me any help regarding this I mean whats the reason its not getting connected to the server. Regards! Inderjeet Kaur. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090121/36f13c0a/attachment.html From nkatsaounos at sch.gr Wed Jan 21 06:31:39 2009 From: nkatsaounos at sch.gr (=?iso-8859-7?B?zd/q7/IgyuH08+Hv/e3v8g==?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:31:39 +0200 Subject: [Olympus developers 89]: Accessing recorded audio file from dialog Message-ID: <4CAC4DADFEFC43FFA1474378305C218B@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Hi all! I want to refer to the name and path of the last recorded audio file in a microphone-based dialog system, from inside the dialog RavenclawDM code (DialogTask.cpp file). Is there any method I can use directely from inside the dialog .cpp file; If not, do I have any alternatives? (except of accessing/modifying the MultiDecoder/AudioServer code..) Thanks in advance Nikos Katsaounos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090121/96845119/attachment.html From nkatsaounos at sch.gr Wed Jan 21 07:54:43 2009 From: nkatsaounos at sch.gr (=?iso-8859-7?B?zd/q7/IgyuH08+Hv/e3v8g==?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:54:43 +0200 Subject: [Olympus developers 90]: audio formats Message-ID: <5247F23F054E4AA5BDD9BFF8B7921652@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Hi. Does anyone know which audio formats are supported by Olympus agent AudioServer; I notice that raw pcm audio format is produced by default. Are other formats supported? (.windows pcm (.wav), .aiff, .au, a-law, mu-law etc) Thanks! Nikos Katsaounos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090121/a90d3fcc/attachment.html From Alex.Rudnicky at cs.cmu.edu Wed Jan 21 10:13:39 2009 From: Alex.Rudnicky at cs.cmu.edu (Alex Rudnicky) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:13:39 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 91]: Re: audio formats In-Reply-To: <5247F23F054E4AA5BDD9BFF8B7921652@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> References: <5247F23F054E4AA5BDD9BFF8B7921652@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Message-ID: <9C0D1A9F38D23E4290347EE31C22B0AF02FD55F0@e2k3.srv.cs.cmu.edu> I believe that only .raw output is currently supported. Producing a standard header (e.g., .wav) is a better idea but this has not been done as yet. Alex From: olympus-developers-bounces at LOGANBERRY.srv.cs.cmu.edu [mailto:olympus-developers-bounces at LOGANBERRY.srv.cs.cmu.edu] On Behalf Of ????? ?atsa????? Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 7:55 AM To: olympus-developers at cs.cmu.edu Subject: [Olympus developers 90]: audio formats Hi. Does anyone know which audio formats are supported by Olympus agent AudioServer; I notice that raw pcm audio format is produced by default. Are other formats supported? (.windows pcm (.wav), .aiff, .au, a-law, mu-law etc) Thanks! Nikos Katsaounos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090121/6cda90eb/attachment.html From antoine.raux at gmail.com Wed Jan 21 12:07:23 2009 From: antoine.raux at gmail.com (Antoine Raux) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:07:23 -0800 Subject: [Olympus developers 92]: Re: Accessing recorded audio file from dialog In-Reply-To: <4CAC4DADFEFC43FFA1474378305C218B@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> References: <4CAC4DADFEFC43FFA1474378305C218B@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Message-ID: <4977564B.5000507@polytechnique.org> Hi Nikos, If you have the utterance as user turn in RavenClaw (i.e. if it went through Phoenix, Helios, Apollo and then to the DM), then the "uttid" (or "utt_id"?) properties of the input will give you the raw file name (e.g. "000", "001", "002"...). The full path to the log directory is also accessible from RavenClaw (since that's where it stores its own log file). Check the "begin_session()" function in Interfaces/GalaxyInterface.cpp That's where it gets the full path from the begin_session frame. Sorry I can't be much more explicit than that since I don't have the code here... If you can't find it, I'll check from home tonight (I'm on the West Coast of the US now). antoine ????? ?????????? wrote: > Hi all! > > I want to refer to the name and path of the last recorded audio file > in a microphone-based dialog system, from inside the dialog > RavenclawDM code (DialogTask.cpp file). Is there any method I can use > directely from inside the dialog .cpp file; If not, do I have any > alternatives? (except of accessing/modifying the > MultiDecoder/AudioServer code..) > > Thanks in advance > Nikos Katsaounos From nkatsaounos at sch.gr Thu Jan 22 05:21:27 2009 From: nkatsaounos at sch.gr (=?iso-8859-7?B?zd/q7/IgyuH08+Hv/e3v8g==?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:21:27 +0200 Subject: [Olympus developers 93]: Re: Accessing recorded audio file from dialog References: <4CAC4DADFEFC43FFA1474378305C218B@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> <4977564B.5000507@polytechnique.org> Message-ID: Antoine, Thanks for your answer. Since I am not very familiar to the RavenClaw dialog methods, I am not sure I understood how to call the appropriate methods.. So, can you send me the exact code I have to write in DialogTask.cpp in order to retrieve the audio? Tanks in advance Nikos Katsaounos ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antoine Raux" To: "????? ??????????" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [Olympus developers 89]: Accessing recorded audio file from dialog > Hi Nikos, > > If you have the utterance as user turn in RavenClaw (i.e. if it went > through Phoenix, Helios, Apollo and then to the DM), then the "uttid" (or > "utt_id"?) properties of the input will give you the raw file name (e.g. > "000", "001", "002"...). > The full path to the log directory is also accessible from RavenClaw > (since that's where it stores its own log file). Check the > "begin_session()" function in Interfaces/GalaxyInterface.cpp That's where > it gets the full path from the begin_session frame. > > Sorry I can't be much more explicit than that since I don't have the code > here... If you can't find it, I'll check from home tonight (I'm on the > West Coast of the US now). > > antoine > > ????? ?????????? wrote: >> Hi all! >> I want to refer to the name and path of the last recorded audio file in >> a microphone-based dialog system, from inside the dialog RavenclawDM code >> (DialogTask.cpp file). Is there any method I can use directely from >> inside the dialog .cpp file; If not, do I have any alternatives? (except >> of accessing/modifying the MultiDecoder/AudioServer code..) >> Thanks in advance >> Nikos Katsaounos > > From nkatsaounos at sch.gr Thu Jan 22 07:43:43 2009 From: nkatsaounos at sch.gr (=?iso-8859-7?B?zd/q7/IgyuH08+Hv/e3v8g==?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:43:43 +0200 Subject: [Olympus developers 94]: ASR versions in Olympus Message-ID: <921637DAE39142DAB540A26F18ABE403@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Hello all I am investigating the possibility of use an Olympus system for dictation systems or applications similar to them that require recognition of quite a large amount of "free" speech data.. My questions are: a) which versions of sphinx are currentely supported by Olympus? I notice that pocketsphinx is used in tutorials. b) is there any version of ASR engines supported in Olympus (eg Sphinx version) that supports "free text" recognition (eg eg for dictation systems) ? In this case can I have a recognition result without defining any grammar? Is pocketsphinx supports such a feature? Thanks a lot Nikos Katsaounos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090122/ee8f35cd/attachment.html From nkatsaounos at sch.gr Mon Jan 26 07:44:23 2009 From: nkatsaounos at sch.gr (=?iso-8859-7?B?zd/q7/IgyuH08+Hv/e3v8g==?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:44:23 +0200 Subject: [Olympus developers 95]: Endpoint of utterance.. Message-ID: <34AD04AB54654449B66371566B383EEF@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Hi again! I set-up an Olympus microphone-based application that uses PocketSphinx for ASR. My problem is that when I make my request, in case no recognition result/concept is produced (for any reason, eg fault of recognition engine, no definition in lexicon, no definition in grammar etc), the application still waits for an input utterance. The behaviour that I want my application to have, is to proceed with a corresponding prompt either there is a valid recognition result or not. So, my question is, how can I define an "endpoint" to user utterance that correspond to the duration of final pause/silense of user utterance (eg 1000msec) ; So, when a user speaks to the microphone, after eg 1000 msec pause of the end of its utterance, recording process is stopped and DM continues, regardless of having or not recognition/concept result. I tried out to find something in Spinxvad component, but I didn't find the way I could implement/configure the above.. Thanks in advance Nikos Katsaounos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090126/c1fa8ab4/attachment.html From tkharris at gmail.com Tue Jan 27 10:52:46 2009 From: tkharris at gmail.com (Thomas Harris) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 10:52:46 -0500 Subject: [Olympus developers 96]: Re: Endpoint of utterance.. In-Reply-To: <34AD04AB54654449B66371566B383EEF@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> References: <34AD04AB54654449B66371566B383EEF@wcl.ee.upatras.gr> Message-ID: <76c228b0901270752t4079c611i64b9e1e65a9018e@mail.gmail.com> Hi ?????, So I just created a short enpointing article that outlines the basic mechanism. Antoine hopefully will correct any of my misconceptions as he's the author of the mechanism. http://wiki.speech.cs.cmu.edu/olympus/index.php/Endpointing Thanks, -Thomas On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 7:44 AM, ????? ?????????? wrote: > Hi again! > > I set-up an Olympus microphone-based application that uses PocketSphinx for > ASR. > My problem is that when I make my request, in case no recognition > result/concept is produced (for any reason, eg fault of recognition engine, > no definition in lexicon, no definition in grammar etc), the application > still waits for an input utterance. > The behaviour that I want my application to have, is to *proceed with a > corresponding prompt either there is a valid recognition result or not.* > So, my question is, *how can I define an "endpoint" to user utterance that > correspond to the duration of final pause/silense of user utterance (eg > 1000msec)* ; So, when a user speaks to the microphone, after eg 1000 msec > pause of the end of its utterance, recording process is stopped and DM > continues, regardless of having or not recognition/concept result. > I tried out to find something in Spinxvad component, but I didn't find the > way I could implement/configure the above.. > > Thanks in advance > > Nikos Katsaounos > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/olympus-developers/attachments/20090127/7db1762a/attachment.html