Breaking News
News & Analysis

Conexant Targets Far-Field Voice Processing for TVs, PCs, Smartphones & Tablets

1/9/2014 04:23 PM EST
2 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Wilton.Helm
User Rank
Author
Multiple microphones
Wilton.Helm   1/14/2014 3:41:44 PM
NO RATINGS
I'm not sure what's up with tablets.  My three year old Droid X has three microphones, specifically for noise canceling purposes.  I'm sure it's not as elaborate as conexant's approach, but it does a pretty good job of sparing my callers from hearing my car stereo or wind noise when they call me.  And its quite a bit smaller than a tablet.

DMcCunney
User Rank
Author
Decouple the microphone from the voice recognition device
DMcCunney   1/14/2014 7:22:54 PM
NO RATINGS
@Max: However, there is a bit of a "gotcha" to all of this, which is the fact that the majority of existing voice processing solutions, such as those employed by smartphone applications, are of a type known as "near-field." Basically, the "near-field" moniker refers to the fact that the user's mouth is "up close and personal" with regard to the microphone on the smartphone. When it comes to controlling things remotely, we need solutions that are capable of far-field voice input processing (FFVIP), which involves a whole new set of challenges.

Depending upon where we are, maybe we don't.

In the home automation scenario described, for example, it would make more sense if there were a number of microphones scattered throughout the residence, so the occupant was always "near field" to one.  The user would speak and say something like "Alarm clock, please wake me at 6am tomorrow"  The microphone nearest the user would pick it up, and transmit it over the home network to the device handling voice processing, which would route the command to the specified device.  There would be no need for the user to be in close proximity to the device being controlled - only in proximity to a microphone that could pick up the command.

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed