Hello,
i use rhasspy now for a bit - and again i can only say: its awesome .
Today i played a little bit with the sentences and i constructed the following:
it says explicit is off but it should beon. Why does it say off - i am confused .
Reason behind all this: I’d like to bring rhasspy to understand a “miss understood” room so that he can say “Sorry I didn’t understand your target room”. This depends on the parameter explicit - if explicit is off rhasspy (or better node red and home assistant) target the next available WiFi speaker.
Can you help me?
Hi @chewyf5, this is a good question. Without the word “kitchen” in your sentences, Rhasspy is not going to know that it’s even a word. Internally, it will probably be interpreted as “spoken noise” and discarded.
Are you using Kaldi or Pocketsphinx? For Kaldi, I’ve done a little bit of work with a special “word” called <unk> that represents “unknown”. I haven’t tested this yet in a set of sentences, but this might be a good case for it.
The idea would be to put <unk> in like this:
play{state:on} <source> (in | at the) (<room> | <unk>:unknown) (:){explicit=on}
Now if someone says “play airplay in the kitchen”, it would get transcribed as “play airplay in the unknown” and you could handle it.
This won’t work right now because <unk> conflicts with the syntax for rules. I’ll either need to come up with some new syntax or reserve <unk> for this special case.
at the moment I am using pocketsphinx indeed. As soon as you bring the “unknown word” - I change, because this is quiet a game changer for me. But - no stress - I think you have enough to do with the dialog manager at the moment. And that is (even for me) much more important -I can’t wait to have a conversation with my “home” via mqtt and node red (with home assistant as my “do the switching and sensoring stuff”-tool).
I will not mark this thread as solved - but I will keep an eye on it, as soon your “unknown word” comes into play.