Improving word prediction using Markov models and Heuristic methods

References

• Boekestein, M. (1996). Word prediction. Unpublished master's the-sis, Catholic University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, D. (1978). Computational distinctions of vocabulary type. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent, D. E. (1967). Word-frequency effect and response bias. Psychological Review, 74, 1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlberger, A., Magnuson, T., Carlberger, J., Wachtmeister, H., & Hunnicutt, S. (1997). Probability-based word prediction for writ-ing support in dyslexia. (PHONUM, pp. 17-20). Stockholm, Sweden: Department of Phonetics, Umee University.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, R., Elenius, K. J., Granstr6m, B., & Hunnicutt, S. (1985, January). Phonetic and orthographic properties of the basic vocabulory of five European languages. Speech Transmission Laboratory/Quarterly Progress and Status Report.
   Google Scholar
• Ejerhed, E., Kallgren, G., Wennstedt, 0., & Astrom, M. (1992). The linguistic annotation system of the Stockholm-Umea corpus project (DGL-UUM-R-33, Report No. 33). Stockholm, Sweden: Department of General Linguistics, Umee University.
   Google Scholar
• Gibler, C. D., & Childress, D.S. (1983). Adaptive dictionary for computer-based communication aids. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering Soci-ety of North America (RESNA) (pp. 65–167). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heckathorne, C. W., Leibowitz, L., & Strysik, J. (1983). MicroDEC II: Anticipatory computer input aid. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering Society of North America (RESNA) (pp. 43–36). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heckathorne, C. W., Voda, J. A., & Leibowitz, L. J. (1987). Design rationale and evaluation of the portable anticipatory communi-cation aid: PACA. Augmentative and Alternative Communica-tion, 3,170–180.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J. (1992). Evaluation of keystroke savings across five assistive communication technologies. Augmenta-tive and Alternative Communication, 8, 258–272.
   Google Scholar
• Hunnicutt, S. (1986). Lexical prediction fora text-to-speech system in communication and handicap. In E. Hjelmquist & L. G. Nils-son (Eds.), Aspects of psychological compensation and techni-cal aids (pp. 253–263). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
   Google Scholar
• Hunnicutt, S. (1987). Input and output alternatives in word predic-tion. (STL-QPSR 2-3/1987). Stockholm, Sweden: Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan.
   Google Scholar
• Hunnicutt, S. (1989). Using syntactic and semantic information in a word prediction aid. In Proceedings of Eurospeech: Vol. 1 (pp. 191–193). Paris: CEP Consultants.
   Google Scholar
• Hunnicutt, S., Bertenstam, J., & Raghavendra, P. (1994). A mor-phologically-based word predictor for Swedish. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineer-ing Society of North America (RESNA) (pp. 106–108). Wash-ington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jelinek, F. (1990). Self-organized language modelling for speech recognition. In A. Waibel & K. F. Lee (Eds.), Readings in speech recognition (pp. 450–506). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Jelinek, F. (1991). Up from trigrams The struggle for improved language models. In Proceedings of Eurospeech: Vol. 3 (pp. 1037–1040). Geneva: European Speech Communication Asso-ciation.
   Google Scholar
• Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of pre-sent day English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lesher, G. W., Moulton, B. J., & Higginbotham, D. J. (1998). Tech-niques for augmenting scanning communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 81–101.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Lindsay, P., Siegel, L., & Fames, P. (1990). The effects of message encoding techniques on recall by literate adults using AAC systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communi-cation, 6,184–201.
   Google Scholar
• Marslen-Wilson, W., & Welsh, A. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 29–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, C., Newell, A. F., Booth, L., & Arnott, J. (1991). Syntax PAL: A system to improve the syntax of those with language dys-function. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering Society of North American (RESNA) (pp. 105–106). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1962). The serial position of free recall. Jour-nal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 482–488.
   Google Scholar
• Newell, A. F., Arnott, J. L., Booth, L., Beattie, W., Brophy, B., & Ricketts, I. W. (1992). Effect of the "PAL" word prediction sys-tem on the quality and quantity of text generation. Augmenta-tive and Alternative Communication, 8, 304–311.
   Google Scholar
• Palazuelos-Cagigas, S., Godino-Llorente, J., & Aguilera Navarro, S. (1997). Comparison between adaptive and non-adaptive word prediction methods in a word processor for motorically handicapped non-vocal users. In G. Anogianakis, C. Burlier, & M. Soede (Eds.), Advancement of assistive technology (pp. 120–124). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Palazuelos, S., Aguilera, S., Ricketts, I., Gregor, P., & Claypool, T. (1998a). Artificial neural networks applied to improving linguis-tic word prediction. In Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (pp. 193–194). Dublin: ISAAC.
   Google Scholar
• Palazuelos, S., Aguilera, S., Rodrigo, J., & Godino, J. (1998b). Grammatical and statistical word prediction system for Spanish integration in an aid for people with disabilities. In R. H. Man-nell & J. Robert-Ribes (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th Interna-tional Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 2479–2482). Sydney: Australian Speech Science and Technol-ogy Association.
   Google Scholar
• Soede, M., & Foulds, R. A. (1986). Dilemma of prediction in com-munication aids and mental load. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference on Rehabilitation Technology (pp. 357–359). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swiffin, A. L., Arnott, J. L., & Newell, A. F. (1987a). The use of syn-tax in a predictive communication aid for the physically handi-capped. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering Society of North America (pp. 124–126). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swiffin, A., Arnott, J., Pickering, A., & Newell, A. (1987b). Adaptive and predictive techniques in a communication prosthesis. Aug-mentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 181–191.
   Google Scholar
• Swiffin, A. L., Pickering, J. A., Arnott, J. L., & Newell, A. F. (1985). PAL: An effort efficient portable communication aid and key-board emulator. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Confer-ence on Rehabilitation Technology, (pp. 197–199). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tyvand, S., & Demasco, P. (1993). Syntax statistics in word pre-diction. In Proceedings of the European Conference on the Advancement of Rehabilitation Technology (ECART2) (p. 11.2). Stockholm: The Swedish Handicap Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Vandyke, J., McCoy, K., & Demasco, P. (1992). Using syntactic knowledge for word prediction. In Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmen-tative and Alternative Communication (p. 175). Philadelphia: ISAAC.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatagiri, H. (1994). Effect of window size on rate of communi-cation in a lexical prediction AAC system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 105–112.
   Google Scholar