summarize the meeting[SEP] <s>grad f: ok . phd c: adam , what is the mike that , uh , jeremy 's wearing ? grad f: it 's the ear - plug mike . postdoc a: ear - plug . phd e: that 's good . phd c: is that a wireless , or ? oh . grad f: no . grad g: it 's wired . professor b: oh ! postdoc a: is that does that mean you ca n't hear anything during the meeting ? grad d: it 's old - school . grad f: huh ? what ? huh ? professor b: should we , uh , close the door , maybe ? grad f: it it 's a fairly good mike , actually . professor b: so it 's yeah . huh . grad f: well , i should n't say it 's a good mike . all i really know is that the signal level is ok . i do n't know if it 's a the quality . professor b: well , that 's a grad f: ugh ! so i did n't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two . so . and , uh . professor b: ok . so , just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week , it was there 's this suggestion of alternating weeks on more , uh , automatic speech recognition related or not ? was that sort of the division ? grad f: right . professor b: so which week are we in ? grad f: well we have n't really started , but i thought we more we more or less did meeting recorder stuff last week , so i thought we could do , uh professor b: i thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too . phd c: yeah . grad f: but i figure also if they 're short agenda items , we could also do a little bit of each . professor b: yeah . grad f: so . i seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted . here we go . professor b: ok . grad f: so , uh , as most of you should know , i did send out the consent form thingies and , uh , so far no one has made any ach ! { comment } { comment } any comments on them . so , no on no one has bleeped out anything . professor b: um . yeah . grad f: so . i do n't expect anyone to . but . professor b: um . so , w what follows ? at some point y you go around and get people to sign something ? grad f: no . we had spoken w about this before professor b: yeah , but i 've forgotten . grad f: and we had decided that they have they only needed to sign once . and the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity . so as long as we do that , we 're covered . professor b: and how long of an opportunity did you tell them ? grad f: uh , july fifteenth . professor b: july fifteenth . oh , so they have a plenty of time , and y grad f: yep . professor b: given that it 's that long , um , um why was that date chosen ? you just felt you wanted to ? grad f: jane told me july fifteenth . so , that 's what i set it . postdoc a: oh . i just meant that that was the release date that you had on the data . professor b: oh , ok . grad f: oh . i i did n't understand that there was something specific . postdoc a: i , uh i thought grad f: you y you had professor b: i do n't grad f: i had heard july fifteenth , so that 's what i put . postdoc a: mm - hmm . professor b: no , the only th the only mention i recall about that was just that july fifteenth or so is when this meeting starts . grad f: so . postdoc a: that 's right . that 's why . professor b: oh , i see . postdoc a: you said you wanted it to be available then . professor b: ok . postdoc a: i did n't mean it to be the hard deadline . professor b: right . postdoc a: it 's fine with me if it is , or we cou but i thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that professor b: w postdoc a: in case , uh you know , `` by the way this is your last `` professor b: right . postdoc a: uh . yeah . professor b: we probably should have talked about it , cuz i because if we wan na be able to give it to people july fifteenth , if somebody 's gon na come back and say `` ok , i do n't want this and this and this used `` , uh , clearly we need some time to respond to that . right ? grad f: yeah . as i said , we i just got one date professor b: yeah . phd h: damn ! grad f: and that 's the one i used . professor b: yeah . grad f: so . but i can send a follow - up . i mean , it 's almost all us . i mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was , uh , these the meetings that in are in set one . phd c: was my was my response ok ? postdoc a: that 's right . phd c: i just wrote you replied to the email saying they 're all fine . grad f: right . i mean , that 's fine . phd c: ok , good . grad f: i we do n't my understanding of what we had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that , uh , we do n't actually need a reply . phd c: that makes it easy . grad f: we just need to tell them that they can do it if they want . professor b: ok . i just did n't remember , but grad f: and so no reply is no changes . postdoc a: and he 's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is `` ok `` . professor b: ok . postdoc a: so that 's very clear all the way down the page , `` ok `` . and they have two options they can change it to . one of them is `` censor `` , and the other one is `` incorrect `` . is it is your word is `` incorrect `` ? grad f: right . postdoc a: which means also we get feedback on if um , there 's something that they w that needs to be adjusted , because , i mean , these are very highly technical things . i mean , it 's an added , uh , level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription , as i see it . but in any case , people can agree to things that are wrong . grad f: well postdoc a: so . grad f: yeah . the reason i did that it was just so that people would not censor not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly , postdoc a: and the reason i liked it was because grad f: as opposed to , uh postdoc a: was because it , um it gives them the option of , uh , being able to correct it . grad f: right . postdoc a: approve it and correct it . and um . so , you have it nicely set up so they email you and , uh grad f: when they submit the form , it gets processed and emailed to me . postdoc a: mm - hmm . mm - hmm . and i wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are robustness and meeting recorder . grad f: so . postdoc a: the german ones will be ready for next week . those are three three of those . a different set of people . and we can impose phd c: the german ones ? postdoc a: uh , well . phd h: yeah . those uh professor b: nsa . postdoc a: ok . i spoke loosely . the the german , french sorry , the german , dutch , and spanish ones . phd e: spanish . yeah . grad f: mm - hmm . phd c: oh , those are the nsa meetings ? phd e: the non - native phd h: those are postdoc a: yeah . uh - huh . professor b: german , dutch , swiss and spanish . phd c: oh , oh ! ok . phd e: the all non - native postdoc a: that 's that 's that 's r grad f: mm - hmm . phd h: uh - huh . phd c: ok . i 'd i d postdoc a: yeah . it 's the other group . professor b: i it was the network network services group . phd c: ok . postdoc a: uh - huh . yeah , exactly . yeah . professor b: yeah . postdoc a: i did n't mean to isolate them . professor b: otherwise known as the german , dutch , and spanish . postdoc a: yeah . sorry . it was it was not the best characterization . grad f: mm - hmm . postdoc a: but what what i meant to say was that it 's the other group that 's not n no m no overlap with our present members . and then maybe it 'd be good to set an explicit deadline , something like a week before that , uh , j july fifteenth date , or two weeks before . professor b: i mean , i would suggest we discuss i mean , if we 're going to have a policy on it , that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people , grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: so that we have a uniform thing . so , tha that 's a month , which is fine . i mean , it seems phd c: twelve hours . grad f: well , the only thing i said in the email is that the data is going to be released on the fifteenth . i did n't give any other deadline . postdoc a: mm - hmm . grad f: so my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says , `` wow i suddenly found something `` , we 'll delete it from our record . we just wo n't delete it from whatever 's already been released . postdoc a: hmm . that 's a little bit difficult . grad f: what else can we do ? postdoc a: yeah . grad f: if someone says `` hey , look , i found something in this meeting and it 's libelous and i want it removed `` . what can we do ? postdoc a: well . that 's true . grad f: we have to remove it . postdoc a: i i agree with that part , but i think that it would it , uh we need to have , uh , a a a message to them very clearly that beyond this date , you ca n't make additional changes . professor b: i mean , um , i i i i think that somebody might request something even though we say that . but i think it 's good to at least start some place like that . postdoc a: mm - hmm . good . professor b: so if we agreed , ok , how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have if we say two weeks , or if we say a month , i think we should just say that say that , you know , i a as um , `` per the the the , uh , page you signed , you have the ability to look over this stuff `` and so forth `` and , uh , because we w `` these , uh i would i would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say `` because we , uh , will continually be making these things available to other researchers , uh , this ca n't be open - ended and so , uh , uh , please give us back your response within this am you know , within this amount of time `` , whatever time we agree upon . grad f: well , did you read the email and look at the pages i sent ? professor b: did i ? no , i have n't yet . no , just grad f: no . ok , well why do n't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change ? professor b: no , no . i 'm not saying that you should change anything . i i 'm what i 'm what i 'm i 'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that that you can you can , uh , decide on something . postdoc a: mm - hmm . professor b: so i 'm not telling you what to decide . postdoc a: mm - hmm . professor b: i 'm just saying you should decide something , postdoc a: ok . professor b: and then grad f: i already did decide something , and that 's what 's in the email . postdoc a: yeah , yeah . ok , so grad f: and if you disagree with it , why do n't you read it and give me comments on it ? postdoc a: yeah . well i i think that there 's one missing line . professor b: well , the one thing that i did read and that you just repeated to me was that you gave the specific date of july fifteenth . grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: and you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you . so what i 'm telling you is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough grad f: right . professor b: and you should use that rather than this date that you just got from somewhere . that 's all i 'm saying . grad f: ok . professor b: ok ? postdoc a: i ha i have one question . this is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town . but we can make the assumption , ca n't we ? that , um , they will be receiving email , uh , most of the month . right ? because if someone professor b: it well , it well , you 're right . sometimes somebody will be away and , uh , you know , there 's , uh for any length of time that you uh , choose there is some person sometime who will not end up reading it . postdoc a: ok . professor b: that 's it 's , you know , just a certain risk to take . phd h: s so maybe when am i on , by the way ? grad f: i do n't know . you should be . phd h: oh . hello ? hello ? grad f: you should be channel b . phd h: oh , ok . alright . so . the , um maybe we should say in w you know , when the whole thing starts , when they sign the the agreement that you know , specify exactly uh , what , you know , how how they will be contacted and they can , you know they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address , or both . and , um , then postdoc a: we did that , i i believe . phd h: right . phd e: yeah . phd h: so . a and , then , you know , say very clearly that if they do n't if we do n't hear from them , you know , as morgan suggested , by a certain time or after a certain period after we contact them that is implicitly giving their agreement . grad f: well , they 've already signed a form . postdoc a: and the form says phd e: and nobody nobody really reads it anyway . phd h: right . grad f: so . and the s and the form was approved by human subjects , phd h: says that . right . postdoc a: uh , the f phd h: well , if that 's i tha if that 's already if grad f: so , eh , that 's gon na be a little hard to modify . postdoc a: well , the form well , the form does n't say , if uh , you know , `` if you do n't respond by x number of days or x number of weeks `` phd h: i see . uh oh , ok . so what does it say about the the the process of of , uh y the review process ? postdoc a: it does n't have a time limit . that you 'll be provided access to the transcripts and then , uh , allowed to remove things that you 'd like to remove , before it goes to the general uh , larger audience . phd h: oh , ok . hmm . right . grad f: here . postdoc a: there you go . grad f: you can read what you already signed . phd h: oh . phd e: i guess when i read it , um phd h: ok . phd e: i 'm not as diligent as chuck , but i had the feeling i should probably respond and tell adam , like , `` i got this and i will do it by this date , and if you do n't hear from me by then `` you know , in other words responding to your email once , right away , saying `` as soon as you get this could you please respond . `` grad f: right . phd e: and then if you if the person thinks they 'll need more time because they 're out of town or whatever , they can tell you at that point ? because grad f: oh , i just i did n't wan na do that , because i do n't wan na have a discussion with every person if i can avoid it . phd e: well , it 's grad f: so what i wanted to do was just send it out and say `` on the fifteenth , the data is released , postdoc a: mm - hmm . grad f: if you wan na do something about it , do something about it , but that 's it `` . postdoc a: i i kind of like this . phd e: well postdoc a: yeah . phd e: ok . so , we 're assuming that phd h: well , that 's that would be great if but you should probably have a legal person look at this and make sure it 's ok . because if you if you , uh , do this and you then there 's a dispute later and , uh , some you know , someone who understands these matters concludes that they did n't have , uh , you know , enough opportunity to actually exercise their their right phd e: or they they might never have gotten the email , because although they signed this , they do n't know by which date to expect your email . and so someone whose machine is down or whatever i mean , we have no professor b: mm - hmm . phd e: in internally we know that people are there , grad f: well , ok . l let me let me reverse this . phd e: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail . grad f: so let 's say someone i send this out , and someone does n't respond . do we delete every meeting that they were in ? phd e: well , then grad f: i do n't think so . phd e: it we 're hoping that does n't happen , phd h: no . phd e: but that 's why there 's such a thing as registered mail grad f: that will happen . phd e: or phd h: that will happen . phd e: right . grad f: that will absolutely happen . because people do n't read their email , or they 'll read and say `` i do n't care about that , i 'm not gon na delete anything `` and they don just wo n't reply to it . phd h: maybe uh , do we have mailing addresses for these people ? grad f: no . we have what they put on the speaker form , phd h: no . postdoc a: well { comment } most grad f: which was just generic contact information . phd h: oh . postdoc a: but the ones that we 're dealing with now are all local , phd h: well , then postdoc a: except the ones who i mean , we we 're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups . phd h: mmm . ok . postdoc a: so maybe , uh , i you know , that 's not that many people and if i if , uh i i there is an advantage to having them admit and if i can help with with processing that , i will . it 's it 's there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating grad f: yeah . i mean i thought we had discussed this , like , a year ago . postdoc a: yes , we did . grad f: and so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again . postdoc a: you 're right . well , i you know . but sometimes professor b: well , we we have n't experienced it before . grad f: so . postdoc a: that 's right . professor b: right ? so phd e: you 'll either wonder at the beginning or you 'll wonder at the end . postdoc a: need to get it right . phd e: i mean , there 's no way to get around i it 's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email . postdoc a: yeah . phd e: and maybe it 's better legally to wonder before you know , a little bit earlier than grad f: well postdoc a: it 's much easier to explain this way . grad f: ok . well , why do n't you talk t postdoc a: t t to have it on record . grad f: morgan , can you talk to our lawyer about it , and find out what the status is on this ? cuz i do n't wan na do something that we do n't need to . postdoc a: yeah , but w mmm . grad f: because what i 'm telling you , people wo n't respond to the email . no matter what you do , you there 're gon na be people who you 're gon na have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with . postdoc a: well , then we make the effort . grad d: i mean , i it 's k grad f: and do we want to spend that effort ? phd h: hmm . postdoc a: we make the effort . grad d: it 's kind of like signing up for a mailing list . they have opt in and opt out . and there are two different ways . i mean , and either way works probably , i mean . postdoc a: except i really think in this case i i 'm agr i agree with liz , that we need to be in the clear and not have to after the fact say `` oh , but i assumed `` , and `` oh , i 'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you `` , you know . professor b: if this is a purely administrative task , we can actually have administration do it . postdoc a: oh , excellent . professor b: but the thing is that , you know , i i i think , without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers , from my previous conversations with them , my my sense very much is that we would want something on record as indicating that they actually were aware of this . postdoc a: yes . grad f: well , we had talked about this before professor b: mm - hmm . grad f: and i thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they 've already signed away the f with that form that they 've already signed once . postdoc a: i do n't remember that this issue of the time period allowed for response was ever covered . grad f: yeah . professor b: yeah . we never really talked about that . grad f: ok . phd e: or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you . postdoc a: or or how they would indicate professor b: yeah . phd e: they probably forgot all about it . professor b: we certainly did n't talk , uh , about with them at all about , uh , the manner of them being made the , uh , uh , materials available . phd e: yeah . phd h: we do it like with these professor b: that was something that was sort of just within our implementation . grad f: ok . phd h: we can use it we can use a a ploy like they use to , um you know , that when they serve , like uh , uh , uh { comment } uh , you know , like dead - beat dads , they they they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope grad d: and they 're served . phd h: and that right ? because and then the the the the thing is served . so you just make it , you know , `` oh , you won you know , go to this web site and you 've , uh you 're `` phd e: that 's why you never open these things that come in the mail . postdoc a: that one . professor b: yeah . grad f: well , it 's just , we 've gone from one extreme to the other , where at one point , a few months ago , morgan was you were saying let 's not do anything , phd h: right . right . no , it i it might postdoc a: well , it does n't matter . phd h: i i it it might well be the case grad f: and now we 're we 're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature ? phd h: it might right . grad f: i mean , what are we gon na doing here ? phd h: it might well be the case that that this is perfectly you know , this is enough to give us a basis t to just , eh , assume their consent if they do n't reply . professor b: well . grad f: mm - hmm . phd h: but , i 'm not you know , me not being a lawyer , i would n't just wan na do that without having the the expert , uh , opinion on that . postdoc a: and how many people ? al - altogether we 've got twenty people . these people are people who read their email almost all the time . grad f: then i think we had better find out , so that we can find a phd h: yeah . professor b: let me look at this again . grad f: right . postdoc a: i i really do n't see that it 's a problem . i i think that it 's a common courtesy to ask them uh , to expect for them to , uh , be able to have @ @ { comment } us try to contact them , grad f: for for th postdoc a: u just in case they had n't gotten their email . i think they 'd appreciate it . professor b: yeah . my adam , my my view before was about the nature of what was of the presentation , grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: of of how my my the things that we 're questioning were along the lines of how easy uh , h how m how much implication would there be that it 's likely you 're going to be changing something , as opposed to grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: that was the kind of dispute i was making before . postdoc a: mm - hmm . i remember that . professor b: but , um , the attorneys , i uh , i can guarantee you , the attorneys will always come back with and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things , but they will always come back with saying that , um , you need to you want to have someth some paper trail or which includes electronic trail that they have , uh , in fact o k 'd it . grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: so , um , i think that if you f i if we send the email as you have and if there 's half the people , say , who do n't respond at all by , you know , some period of time , we can just make a list of these people and hand it to , uh you know , just give it to me and i 'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever , grad f: right . professor b: and they 'll just call them up and say , you know , `` have you is is this ok ? and would you please mail you know , mail adam that it is , if i if it , you know , is or not . `` so , you know , we can we can do that . phd e: the other thing that there 's a psychological effect that at least for most people , that if they 've responded to your email saying `` yes , i will do it `` or `` yes , i got your email `` , they 're more likely to actually do it { comment } later than to just ignore it . professor b: mm - hmm . phd e: and of course we do n't want them to bleep things out , but it it 's a little bit better if we 're getting the their , uh , final response , once they 've answered you once than if they never answer you 'd { comment } at al at all . that 's how these mailing houses work . so , i mean , it 's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting responses . postdoc a: mm - hmm . phd e: you know , an official ok from somebody is better than no answer , even if they responded that they got your email . and they 're probably more likely to do that once they 've responded that they got the email . postdoc a: i also think they 'd just simply appreciate it . i think it 's a good a good way of of fostering goodwill among our subjects . well , our participants . professor b: i think the main thing is i mean , what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases . grad f: sending lots of spam . professor b: so they s so so tha - that 's what they 're paid to do . grad f: yep . professor b: and so , it is certainly possible that , uh , somebody 's server would be down or something and they would n't actually hear from us , and then they find this thing is in there and we 've already distributed it to someone . so , what it says in there , in fact , is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah , postdoc a: mm - hmm . professor b: but if in fact if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they did n't actually receive it for some reason , um , then we have n't given them that . grad f: well , so how far do we have to go ? do we need to get someone 's signature ? or , is email enough ? professor b: i i i em email is enough . grad f: do we have to have it notarized ? i mean ok . professor b: yeah . i mean , i 've been through this i mean , i 'm not a lawyer , but i 've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: so i i i i 'm pretty comfortable with that . phd c: do you track , um , when people log in to look at the ? grad f: uh . if they submit the form , i get it . phd c: uh - huh . grad f: if they do n't submit the form , it goes in the general web log . but that 's not sufficient . phd c: hmm . grad f: right ? cuz if someone just visits the web site that does n't imply anything in particular . phd c: except that you know they got the mail . postdoc a: mm - hmm . that 's right . grad f: right . postdoc a: i i could get you on the notify list if you want me to . grad f: i 'm already on it . postdoc a: for that directory ? ok , great . grad f: mm - hmm . professor b: so again , hopefully , um , this should n't be quite as odious a problem either way , uh , in any of the extremes we 've talked about because uh , we 're talking a pretty small number of people . grad f: w for this set , i 'm not worried , because we basically know everyone on it . professor b: mm - hmm . postdoc a: hmm . professor b: mm - hmm . grad f: you know , they 're all more or less here or it 's it 's eric and dan and so on . but for some of the others , you 're talking about visitors who are gone from icsi , whose email addresses may or may not work , professor b: mm - hmm . postdoc a: oh . professor b: mm - hmm . grad f: and so what are we gon na do when we run into someone that we ca n't get in touch with ? postdoc a: i do n't think , uh they 're so recent , these visitors . grad f: mm - hmm . postdoc a: i and and i they 're also so professor b: mm - hmm . postdoc a: they 're prominent enough that they 're easy to find through i i mean , i i w i 'll be able to if you have any trouble finding them , i really think i could find them . grad f: other methods ? ok . professor b: yeah . cuz it what it what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission . um , and i think , you know , if you go into a room and close the door and and ask their permission and they 're not there , it does n't seem { comment } that that 's the intent of , uh , meaning here . so . grad f: well , the qu the question is just whether how active it has to be . i mean , because they they filled out a contact information and that 's where i 'm sending the information . professor b: right . grad f: and so far everyone has done email . there is n't anyone who did , uh , any other contact method . professor b: well , the way icsi goes , people , uh , who , uh , were here ten years ago still have acc have forwards to other accounts and so on . grad f: yeah . professor b: so it 's unusual that that they , uh grad f: so my original impression was that that was sufficient , that if they give us contact information and that contact information is n't accurate that we fulfilled our burden . professor b: yeah . phd e: then they just come back . phd c: all my files were still here . phd e: same as us . postdoc a: i just professor b: so if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe i will call the attorney about it . phd c: yeah . grad f: ok . professor b: but , you know , hopefully we wo n't need to . postdoc a: i d i just do n't think we will . for all the reasons that we 've discussed . grad f: alright . professor b: so we 'll we 'll see if we do or not . grad f: yep . and we 'll see how many people respond to that email . postdoc a: yeah . grad f: so far , two people have . professor b: yeah . i think very few people will grad f: so . professor b: and and and , you know , people people see long emails about things that they do n't think is gon na be high priority , they typically , uh , do n't do n't read it , or half read it . grad f: right . professor b: cuz people are swamped . postdoc a: and actually , professor b: but postdoc a: um , i i did n't anticipate this so i that 's why i did n't give this comment , and it i this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying `` by the way , you know , we wan na hear back from you by x date and please `` , and then add what liz said `` please , uh , respond to please indicate you received this mail . `` professor b: uh , or e well , maybe even additionally , uh , um , `` even if you 've decided you have no changes you 'd like to make , if you could tell us that `` . grad f: respond to the email . { comment } yep . postdoc a: mm - hmm . it is the first time through the cycle . professor b: yeah . phd e: right . that would that would definitely work on me . you know , it makes you feel m like , um , if you were gon na p if you 're predicting that you might not answer , you have a chance now to say that . whereas , i i mean , i would be much more likely myself , phd c: and the other th phd e: given all my email , t to respond at that point , saying `` you know what , i 'm probably not gon na get to it `` or whatever , rather than just having seen the email , thinking i might get to it , and never really , uh , pushing myself to actually do it until it 's too late . phd c: yeah . i was i was thinking that it also lets them know that they do n't have to go to the page to accept this . phd e: right . r right . that 's true . professor b: right . phd c: i mean , i i yeah . so that way they could they can see from that email that if they just write back and say `` i got it , no changes `` , they 're off the hook . professor b: yeah . phd c: they do n't have to go to the web page professor b: i mean , the other thing i 've learned from dealing with dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth , uh , is , um , if you say `` you 've got three months to do this review `` , um , people do it , you know , two and seven eighths months from now . phd c: and phd e: yeah . that 's true . professor b: if you say `` you 've got three weeks to do this review `` , they do do it , you know , two and seven eighths weeks from now they do the review . grad f: right . professor b: and , um so , if we make it a little less time , i do n't think it 'll be that much grad f: well , and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth , that means we better give them deadline of the first , if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time . professor b: there 's the responding part and there 's also what if , uh , i mean , i hope this does n't happen , what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes ? grad f: right . professor b: then we actually have to deal with that postdoc a: mm - hmm . some lead time . professor b: if we want it to grad f: ugh ! disk space , postdoc a: by the way , has has jeremy signed the form ? grad f: oh my god ! i had n't thought about that . postdoc a: ok . grad f: that for every meeting any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of . phd h: oh . phd c: just that channel . grad d: ca n't you just do that channel ? phd c: oh , no . we have to do grad f: no , of course not . phd e: yeah . you have to do all of them , grad f: you need all the channels . grad d: oh . phd c: do you have to do the other close - talking ? phd e: as well as all of these . grad d: yeah . phd e: you have to do all you could just do it in that time period , though , grad f: yes . absolutely . there 's a lot of cross - talk . grad g: wow . postdoc a: well phd e: but i guess it 's a pain . grad f: well , but you have to copy the whole file . phd e: yeah . grad f: right ? because we 're gon na be releasing the whole file . phd e: yeah . you 're right . postdoc a: well i you know , i think at a certain point , that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy . grad f: yeah . it 's just i hate deleting any data . so i i do n't want i really would rather make a copy of it , rather than bleep it out professor b: are you del are you bleeping it by adding ? grad f: and then overlapping . so , it 's it 's exactly a censor bleep . so what i really think is `` bleep `` professor b: i i i i understand , but is is it summing signals grad f: and then i want to professor b: or do you delete the old one and put the new one in ? grad f: i delete the old one , put the new one in . professor b: oh , ok . cuz grad f: there 's nothing left of the original signal . professor b: oh . cuz if you were summing , you could no . but anyway grad f: yeah . it would be qui quite easy to get it back again . postdoc a: but and then w i was gon na say also that the they do n't have to stay on the system , as you know , professor b: yeah . phd e: then someday we can sell the unedited versions . postdoc a: cuz cuz the the ones grad f: say again ? postdoc a: once it 's been successfully bleeped , ca n't you rely on the ? phd c: or we 'll tell people the frequency of the beep professor b: encrypt it . phd c: and then they could subtract the beep out . grad d: you can hide it . yeah . postdoc a: ca n't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version ? phd h: oh , yeah . grad d: it would n't be that hard to hide it . phd e: right . exactly . i see . grad f: yeah , that 's true . yeah . yep , that 's true . phd e: see , this is good . i wanted to create some side conversations in these meetings . postdoc a: ok . professor b: yeah . you could encrypt it , you know , with a with a two hundred bit thousand bit , uh grad d: you can use spread spectrum . phd c: uh - huh . grad d: hide it . phd e: so phd c: here we go . phd e: yeah . yeah . grad d: yeah , there you go . phd e: cuz we do n't have enough asides . phd h: i have an idea . you reverse the signal , grad d: there you go . phd h: so it it lets people say what they said backwards . grad f: backwards . grad d: then you have , like , subliminal , uh , messages , grad f: but , ha you 've seen the this the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments . phd h: yeah . grad d: like . grad f: did you read that paper ? it would n't work . phd h: no . grad f: the speech recognizer still works . phd e: yeah . and if you do it backward then professor b: yeah . phd c: that 's cuz they use forward - backward . phd e: h - good old hmm . grad f: forward but backward . that 's right . phd e: no , it 's backward - forward . grad f: good point . a point . well , i 'm sorry if i sound a little peeved about this whole thing . it 's just we 've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we 've never gotten it resolved . postdoc a: hmm . professor b: well , but we never also we 've also never done it . phd e: uh . grad f: so . postdoc a: this is the first cycle . phd e: if it makes grad f: yeah . postdoc a: there 're bound to be some glitches the first time through . professor b: so . and , uh and i 'm sorry responding without , uh , having much knowledge , but the thing is , uh , i am , like , one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and and stuff comes in as grad f: well , and that 's exactly why i did it the way i did it , which is the default is if you do nothing we 're gon na release it . professor b: yeah . grad f: because , you know , i have my stack of emails of to d to be done , that , you know , fifty or sixty long , and the ones at the top i 'm never gon na get to . professor b: right . grad f: and , uh so so phd c: move them to the bottom . professor b: so so the only thing we 're missing is is some way to respond to easily to say , uh , `` ok , go ahead `` or something . grad f: yeah , right . so , i this is gon na mean phd c: just re - mail them to yourself and then they 're at the bottom . professor b: yeah . grad f: yeah . postdoc a: yeah . grad f: yeah . that 's actually definitely a good point . the m email does n't specify that you can just reply to the email , as op as opposed to going to the form postdoc a: mm - hmm . phd h: in postdoc a: and it also does n't give a a specific i did n't think of it . phd e: right . grad f: and postdoc a: s i think it 's a good idea an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite . grad f: yeah , release . postdoc a: and and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint . professor b: yeah . it 's converging . postdoc a: yeah . that 's right . phd h: this um , i 've seen this recently . uh , i got email , and it i if i use a mime - capable mail reader , it actually says , you know , click on this button to confirm receipt of the of the mail . postdoc a: oh , that 's interesting . grad d: hmm . phd h: so grad f: you you can grad d: it 's like certified mail . grad f: a lot of mailers support return receipt . postdoc a: could do that . phd h: right . grad f: but it does n't confirm that they 've read it . phd h: no , no , no . this is different . this is not so , i i know , you can tell , you know , the , uh , mail delivery agent to to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox . postdoc a: mmm . grad f: right . phd h: but but , no . this was different . ins - in the mail , there was a grad f: oh , just a button . phd h: uh , th there was a button that when you clicked on it , it would send , uh , you know , a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail . grad f: oh , yeah . yeah . unfor - yeah , we could do that . but i hate that . phd h: but it o but it only works for , you know , mime - capable you know , if you use netscape or something like that for your n grad f: yeah . professor b: and phd e: you might as well just respond to the mail . professor b: and we actually need a third thing . phd e: i mean phd h: right . professor b: it 's not that you 've looked at it , it 's that you 've looked at it and and and agree with one of the possible actions . phd h: no , no . you can do that . professor b: right ? phd h: you know , you can put this button anywhere you want , professor b: oh ? oh , i see . phd h: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say `` here , by you know , by clicking on this , i i agree uh , you know , i acknowledge `` professor b: that i i my first - born children are yours , and yeah . yeah . phd e: quick question . are , um grad f: well , i could put a url in there without any difficulty and even pretty simple mime readers can do that . so . postdoc a: but why should n't they just email back ? i do n't see there 's a problem . professor b: yeah . grad f: yeah . reply . phd h: right . postdoc a: it 's very nice . i i like the high - tech aspect of it , professor b: yeah . postdoc a: but i think phd h: no , no , no . i actually do n't . postdoc a: i appreciate it . phd h: i 'm just saying that grad f: well , i cuz i use a text mail reader . phd h: if ev but i 'm phd e: do n't you use vi for your mai ? phd h: yeah . professor b: wow . that 's that 's my guy . alright . grad f: you you read email in vi ? phd h: yeah . postdoc a: yeah . i like vi . phd h: so i i there 's these logos that you can put at the bottom of your web page , like `` powered by vi `` . grad d: yeah . professor b: wow . grad d: i see . phd e: anyway , quick question . grad f: you could put wed bugs in the email . phd e: how m phd h: yeah . phd e: like , there were three meetings this time , or so postdoc a: six . phd e: or how many ? six ? but , no of different people . so i guess if you 're in both these types of meetings , you 'd have a lot . but how i mean , it also depends on how many like , if we release this time it 's a fairly small number of meetings , but what if we release , like , twenty - five meetings to people ? in th grad f: well , what my s expectation is , is that we 'll send out one of these emails every time a meeting has been checked and is ready . phd e: i do n't know . oh . oh , ok . so this time was just the first chunk . ok . grad f: so . tha - that was my intention . it 's just yeah that we just happened to have a bunch all at once . phd e: well , that 's a good idea . grad f: i mean , maybe is that the way it 's gon na be , you think , jane ? postdoc a: i agree with you . it 's we could do it , uh i i could i 'd be happy with either way , batch - wise what i was thinking uh , so this one that was exactly right , that we had a uh , uh i i had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready . do n't have it . but , uh , this was the biggest clump i could do by a time where i thought it was reasonable . professor b: mm - hmm . postdoc a: people would be able to check it and still have it ready by then . my , um i was thinking that with the nsa meetings , i 'd like there are three of them , and they 're uh , i i will have them done by monday . uh , unfortunately the time is later and i do n't know how that 's gon na work out , but i thought it 'd be good to have that released as a clump , too , because then , you know , they 're they they have a it it 's in a category , it 's not quite so distracting to them , is what i was thinking , and it 's all in one chu but after that , when we 're caught up a bit on this process , then , um , i could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available . phd e: ok . postdoc a: i could do it either way . i mean , it 's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking . professor b: we heard anything from ibm ? at all ? phd c: uh . let 's see . we yeah , right . so we got the transcript back from that one meeting . everything seemed fine . adam had a script that will put everything back together and there was well , there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix . and then , um , we , uh i sent him a pointer to three more . and so he 's off and working on those . grad f: yeah . now we have n't actually had anyone go through that meeting , to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff . postdoc a: that 's on my list . grad f: so at some point we need to do that . phd c: yeah . postdoc a: well , that 's on my list . phd c: yeah . it 's gon na have to go through our regular process . grad f: i mean , the one thing i noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels . there are a fair number of `` yeahs `` and `` uh - huhs `` that it 's just that are n't in there . so . postdoc a: hmm . professor b: but i think yeah . like you said , i mean , that 's that 's gon na be our standard proc that 's what the transcribers are gon na be spending most of their time doing , i would imagine , postdoc a: mm - hmm . mm - hmm , mm - hmm . professor b: once once we grad f: yes , absolutely . yeah . postdoc a: one question about the backchannels . professor b: it 's gon na postdoc a: do you suppose that was because they were n't caught by the pre - segmenter ? grad f: yes , absolutely . absolutely . postdoc a: oh , interesting . oh , interesting . ok . grad f: yeah . they 're they 're not in the segmented . postdoc a: ok . grad f: it 's not that the ibm people did n't do it . postdoc a: ok . grad f: just they did n't get marked . postdoc a: ok . so maybe when the detector for that gets better or something i w i there 's another issue which is this we 've been , uh , contacted by university of washington now , of course , to , um we sent them the transcripts that correspond to those six meetings and they 're downloading the audio files . so they 'll be doing that . chuck 's chuck 's , uh , put that in . phd c: mm - hmm . yeah , i pointed them to the set that andreas put , uh , on the web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can . and , um , then once , uh , th we can also point them at the , um , uh , the original meetings and they can grab those , too , with scp . phd e: wait . so you put the reference files ? phd c: no , no . they d they wanted the audio . phd e: or the ? phd c: jane sent them the , uh , transcripts . phd e: no , i mean of the transcripts . um . well , we can talk about it off - line . phd c: mm - hmm . grad f: there 's another meeting in here , what , at four ? right ? yeah , so we have to finish by three forty - five . phd h: d d so , does washi - does does uw wan na u do this wan na use this data for recognition or for something else ? phd c: uh , for recognition . phd e: i think they 're doing w phd h: oh . phd e: did n't they want to do language modeling on , you know , recognition - compatible transcripts phd h: oh . i see . postdoc a: this is to show you , uh , some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure . professor b: yeah . phd e: or ? postdoc a: um @ @ { comment } so , this is from one of the nsa meetings and , uh , i if you 're familiar with the diff format , the arrow to the left is what it was , and the arrow to the right is what it was changed to . so , um . and now the first one . `` ok . so , then we started a weekly meeting . the last time , uh `` and the transcriber thought `` little too much `` but , uh , really , um , it was `` we learned too much `` , which makes more sense syntactically as well . phd h: and these the parentheses were f from postdoc a: then oh , this that 's the convention for indicating uncertain . grad f: u uncertains . postdoc a: so the transcriber was right . phd h: s postdoc a: you know , she was uncertain about that . phd h: ok . postdoc a: so she 's right to be uncertain . and it 's also a g a good indication of the of that . phd h: oh . { comment } ok . postdoc a: the next one . this was about , uh , claudia and she 'd been really b busy with stuff , such as waivers . uh , ok . um , next one . um . this was an interesting one . so the original was `` so that 's not so claudia 's not the bad master here `` , and then he laughs , but it really `` web master `` . grad f: web master . grad d: oh . { comment } uh - oh . postdoc a: and then you see another type of uncertainty which is , you know , they just did n't know what to make out of that . so instead of `` split upon unknown `` , { comment } it 's `` split in principle `` . grad f: yep . grad d: jane , these are from ibm ? grad f: spit upon ? grad d: the top lines ? postdoc a: no , no . these are these are our local transcriptions of the nsa meetings . grad f: no , these are ours . postdoc a: the transcribers transcriber 's version ver versus the checked version . grad d: oh . oh , i see . postdoc a: my my checked version , after i go through it . grad d: ok . postdoc a: um , then you get down here . um . sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms . that 's the next example , the next one . the , uh , version beyond this is so instead of saying `` or `` , especially those words , `` also `` and `` oder `` and some other ones . those sneak in . um , the next one grad f: that 's cool . phd h: discourse markers . postdoc a: s phd h: discourse markers . postdoc a: sorry , what ? discourse markers ? sure . sure , sure , sure . phd h: discourse markers . postdoc a: and it 's and it makes sense phd h: yeah . yeah . postdoc a: cuz it 's , like , below this it 's a little subliminal there . phd h: yeah . yeah , yeah . postdoc a: um . ok , the next one , uh , this is a term . the problem with terminology . description with th the transcriber has `` x as an advance `` . but really it 's `` qs in advance `` . i mean , i i 've benefited from some of these , uh , cross - group meetings . ok , then you got , um , uh , instead of `` from something - or - other cards `` , { comment } it 's `` for multicast `` . and instead of `` ann system related `` , it 's `` end system related `` . this was changed to an acronym initially and it should should n't have been . and then , you can see here `` gps `` was misinterpreted . it 's just totally understanda this is this is a lot of jargon . um , and the final one , the transcriber had th `` in the core network itself or the exit unknown , not the internet unknown `` . and it it comes through as `` in the core network itself of the access provider , not the internet backbone core `` . now this is a lot of terminology . and they 're generally extremely good , phd h: mmm . postdoc a: but , you know in this this area it really does pay to , um to double check and i 'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you 'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the you know , there 're a lot of these in there . phd h: yeah . so how often ? grad f: yeah , but i bet i bet they 're acoustically challenging parts anyway , though . postdoc a: no , actually no . grad d: mmm . postdoc a: huh - uh . grad f: oh , really ? uh , it 's oh , so it 's just jargon . postdoc a: it 's jargon . yeah . i mean this is cuz , you know you do n't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you 're hearing . phd h: well , but postdoc a: and it 's jar it 's jargon coupled with a foreign accent . phd h: but but but we do n't i mean , our language model right now does n't know about these words anyhow . so , professor b: yeah . phd h: you know , un until you actually get a decent language model , @ @ { comment } adam 's right . grad f: it probably wo n't do any better . phd h: you probably wo n't notice a difference . but it 's i mean , it 's definitely good that these are fixed . i mean , obviously . postdoc a: well , also from the standpoint of getting people 's approval , professor b: yeah . postdoc a: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh , um , barely decipherable w you know , sentences , and then is asked to approve of it or not , it 's , uh , uh grad f: did i say that ? professor b: yeah . postdoc a: ok . professor b: yeah . that would be a shame if people said `` well , i do n't approve it because the it 's not what i said `` . grad f: well , that 's exactly why i put the extra option in , professor b: yeah . postdoc a: exactly . that 's why we discussed that . professor b: yeah . grad f: is that i was afraid people would say , `` let 's censor that because it 's wrong `` , professor b: yeah . grad f: and i do n't want them to do that . postdoc a: and then i also the final thing i have for transcription is that i made a purchase of some other headphones phd h: c postdoc a: because of the problem of low gain in the originals . and and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones , and actually i i mean , i i think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the the choice . we 'd originally chosen , uh , very expensive head headsets grad f: yeah . ugh ! postdoc a: but , um , they 're just not as good as these , um , in this with this respect to this particular task . phd h: well , return the old ones . grad f: it 's probably impedance matching problems . postdoc a: i do n't know exactly , grad f: but postdoc a: but we chose them because that 's what 's been used here by prominent projects in transcription . professor b: could be . postdoc a: so it i we had every reason to think they would work . grad f: mm - hmm . phd h: so you have spare headsets ? postdoc a: sorry , what ? phd h: you have spare headsets ? grad f: they 're just earphones . they 're not headsets . they 're not microphones . phd e: right . phd h: no , no . i mean , just earphones ? um , because i , uh , i could use one on my workstation , just to t because sometimes i have to listen to audio files and i do n't have to b go borrow it from someone and postdoc a: we have actua actually i have w well , the thing is , that if we have four people come to work for a day , i was i was hanging on to the others for , eh for spares , phd h: oh , ok . postdoc a: but i can tell you what i recommend . professor b: no , but you 'd if you yeah , w we should get it . phd h: sure . no problem . grad f: but if you need it , just get it . phd h: i just grad f: come on . phd h: right . professor b: yeah . if you need it . phd h: yeah . professor b: yeah . postdoc a: it 'd just have to be a s a separate order an added order . grad d: yeah , i still i still need to get a pair , too . professor b: they 're they 're they 're they 're pretty inexpensive . phd e: yeah , that we should order a cou uh , t two or three or four , actually . professor b: yeah . grad d: i 'm using one of these . yeah . phd e: we have phd h: i think i have a pair that i brought from home , but it 's f just for music listening professor b: no . just just just just buy them . phd e: sh - just get the model number phd h: and it 's not nnn . yeah . professor b: just buy them . phd e: and where do you buy these from ? phd h: yeah . postdoc a: cambridge soundworks , just down the street . phd e: like ? you just b go and b postdoc a: yeah . they always have them in stock . phd e: oh . professor b: yeah . phd e: that 'd be a good idea . phd h: anyway . professor b: yeah . grad f: w uh , could you email out the brand ? postdoc a: oh , sure . yeah . ok . grad f: cuz i think sounds like people are interested . grad d: yeah . professor b: yeah . grad d: definitely . grad f: so . postdoc a: it 's made a difference in in how easy . yeah . professor b: i realized something i should talk about . so what 's the other thing on the agenda actually ? grad f: uh , the only one was don wanted to , uh , talk about disk space yet again . grad d: yeah . u it 's short . i mean , if you wan na go , we can just throw it in at the end . professor b: no , no . why do n't you why do n't you go ahead since it 's short . grad d: um , well , uh . grad f: oh , i thought you meant the disk space . yeah , we know disk space is short . phd h: the disk space was short . yeah . that 's what i thought too . phd e: that 's a great ambiguity . professor b: yeah . phd e: it 's one of these it 's it 's social professor b: it 's i i i it i phd e: and , uh , discourse level grad d: yeah . phd e: and professor b: yeah , it 's great . yeah , phd e: sorry . professor b: double double grad f: yeah , it was really goo phd e: see , if i had that little scratch - pad , i would have made an x there . grad d: thank you , thank you . grad f: uh , well , we 'll give you one then . professor b: yeah . grad d: um . so , um , without thinking about it , when i offered up my hard drive last week grad f: oh , no . grad d: um , this is always a suspect phrase . phd e: it was while i was out of town . grad d: but , um , no . i , uh i realized that we 're going to be doing a lot of experiments , um , o for this , uh , paper we 're writing , so we 're probably gon na need a lot more we 're probably gon na need that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive . but , um , we also have someone else coming in that 's gon na help us out with some stuff . professor b: we 've just ordered a hundred gigabytes . grad d: so ok . we just need to phd e: i think we need , like , another eighteen gig disk to be safe . professor b: well , we 're getting three thirty thirty - sixes . phd e: so . professor b: right ? grad d: ok . professor b: that are going into the main f file server . phd e: ok . professor b: so . phd c: markham 's ordering and they should be coming in soon . grad d: w well . so so grad f: soon ? grad d: yeah . i mean , i guess the thing is is , all i need is to hang it off , like , the person who 's coming in , sonali 's , computer . phd h: oh , so so , you mean the d the internal the disks on the machines that we just got ? grad d: whew . or we can move them . grad f: no . phd c: these are gon na go onto abbott . grad f: ne - new disks . phd h: or extra disk ? professor b: onto abbott , the file server . grad d: so are we gon na move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in ? grad f: on phd h: oh , oh . ok . grad f: yeah . phd e: uh , i grad f: once they come in . sure . grad d: ok . that 's fine . phd e: do when when is this planned for roughly ? phd c: they should be i i imagine next week or something . grad d: ok . phd e: ok . so grad f: if you 're if you 're desperate , i have some space on my drive . grad d: i think if i 'm grad f: but i i vacillate between no space free and a few gig free . grad d: yeah . i think i can find something if i 'm desperate phd e: yeah . grad f: so . grad d: and , um , in the meantime i 'll just hold out . grad f: ok . grad d: that was the only thing i wanted to bring up . phd c: it should be soon . we we should grad d: ok . professor b: so there 's another hundred gig . so . grad d: alright . great . phd h: mm - hmm . professor b: ok . it 's great to be able to do it , grad d: that 's it . professor b: just say `` oh yeah , a hundred gig , phd e: good . professor b: no big deal `` . grad d: yeah . grad f: yeah . a hundred gig here , a hundred gig there . phd e: well , each meeting is like a gig or something , grad f: it 's eventually real disk space . professor b: yeah . phd e: so it 's really professor b: yeah . um . yeah . i was just going to comment that i i 'm going to , uh , be on the phone with mari tomorrow , late afternoon . grad f: oh , yeah . professor b: we 're supposed to get together and talk about , uh , where we are on things . uh , there 's this meeting coming up , uh , and there 's also an annual report . now , i never actually i i was asking about this . i do n't really quite understand this . she was re she was referring to it as i think this actually did n't just come from her , but this is what , uh , darpa had asked for . um , she 's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year . but of course the fiscal year starts in october , so i do n't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we 're writing in july . phd c: she 's either really late or really early . grad f: huh . or she 's getting a good early start . professor b: uh , i think basically it it 's none of those . it 's that the meeting is in july so they so darpa just said do an annual report . so . so . so anyway , i 'll be putting together stuff . i 'll do it , uh , you know , as much as i can without bothering people , just by looking at at papers and status reports . i mean , the status reports you do are very helpful . phd h: hmm . professor b: uh , so i can grab stuff there . and if , uh if i have some questions i 'll grad f: when we remember to fill them out . professor b: yeah . if people could do it as soon as as you can , if you have n't done one si recently . uh . uh , but , you know , i 'm i 'm sure before it 's all done , i 'll end up bugging people for for more clarification about stuff . um . but , um , i do n't know , i guess i guess i know pretty much what people have been doing . we have these meetings and and there 's the status reports . uh . but , um . um . yeah . so that was n't a long one . just to tell you that . and if something has n't , uh i 'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon , and if something has n't been in a status report and you think it 's important thing to mention on this kind of thing , uh , uh , just pop me a one - liner and and and i 'll i 'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation . phd h: ok . professor b: uh . i guess , uh , you you 're still pecking away at the demos and all that , probably . grad f: yep . and don is gon na be helping out with that . professor b: oh , that 's right . grad f: so . professor b: ok . grad f: did you wan na talk about that this afternoon ? grad d: um . grad f: not here , but later today ? grad d: we should probably talk off - line about when we 're gon na talk off - line . grad f: ok . ok . professor b: ok . yeah , i might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz , um , i 'm actually gon na have a a few days off the following week , a after the after the picnic . so . grad f: oh , ok . professor b: that 's all i had . grad f: so we were gon na do sort of status of speech transcription automatic transcription , but we 're kind of running late . so . phd e: how long does it take you to save the data ? grad f: fifteen minutes . phd e: yeah . grad f: so . if you wan na do a quick phd e: yeah . grad f: ten minute phd e: guess we should stop , like , twenty of at the latest . professor b: uh phd e: we we have another meeting coming in that they wan na record . professor b: and there 's the digits to do . phd e: so . professor b: so maybe may maybe maybe grad f: yeah . well , we can skip the digits . professor b: we could . fi - five minute report or something . phd e: it 's up to you . i do n't professor b: yeah , yeah . grad f: whatever you want . professor b: well , i would love to hear about it , grad f: what do you have to say ? professor b: especially since grad f: i 'm interested , so professor b: yeah . well , i 'm gon na be on the phone tomorrow , so this is just a good example of the sort of thing i 'd like to hear about . phd e: wait . why is everybody looking at me ? phd c: i do n't know . grad f: sorry . professor b: cuz he looked at you phd h: what ? professor b: and says you 're sketching . phd e: uh . i 'm not sure what you were referring to . phd h: i i i i 'm not actually , i 'm not sure what ? are we supposed to have done something ? grad f: no . we were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting . phd h: oh . phd e: uh - huh . grad f: and this week we were gon na try to do t automatic transcription status . phd h: alternating . phd e: i was n't here last week . sorry . phd h: oh ! phd e: oh . grad f: but we sort of failed . phd h: we did that last week . right ? phd e: hhh . grad f: no . professor b: i thought we did . grad f: did we ? ok . phd h: yeah . we did . grad f: ok . so now now we have the schedule . so next week we 'll do automatic transcription status , plus anything that 's real timely . phd h: ok . phd e: oh . ok . postdoc a: ok . professor b: ok . whew ! phd c: good update . grad f: whew ! professor b: that was grad f: dodged that bullet . professor b: yeah . nicely done , liz . postdoc a: a woman of few words . professor b: but but lots of prosody . ok . ok . grad f: th phd h: uh , i mean , we we really have n't done anything . grad f: excuse me ? phd h: sorry . postdoc a: well , since last week . phd e: yeah , we 're phd h: i mean , the the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the , um the automatic alignments because , uh , i got some i i i learned from thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we 're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech or , of the foreground speech with background speech . grad f: yeah . phd h: so . phd e: and then , uh , i guess , the new data that don will start to process phd h: but , we have n't actually phd e: the , um when he can get these you know , before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems phd h: mmm . phd e: because you have timed sp at on either side . grad f: oh . right , right . mm - hmm . phd e: and so that 's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step . grad f: right . postdoc a: i 'll be interested . phd e: we did get our , um i guess , good news . we got our abstract accepted for this conference , um workshop , isca workshop , in , um , uh , new jersey . and we sent in a very poor abstract , but they very poor , very quick . um , but we 're hoping to have a paper for that as well , which should be an interesting grad f: when 's it due ? phd e: the t paper is n't due until august . the abstracts were already due . so it 's that kind of workshop . grad f: mm - hmm . phd e: but , i mean , the good news is that that will have sort of the european experts in prosody sort of a different crowd , and i think we 're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far , so that should be interesting . postdoc a: what 's the name of the meeting ? phd e: uh , it 's isca workshop on prosody in speech recognition and understanding , or something like that phd h: it 's called prosody to grad f: mm - hmm . postdoc a: good . phd e: some generic uh , so it 's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there 's a um , a web page for it . professor b: y you going to , uh , eurospeech ? yeah . grad f: i do n't have a paper phd h: yeah . grad f: but i 'd kinda like to go , if i could . is that alright ? professor b: we 'll discuss it . grad f: ok . i guess that 's `` no `` . professor b: my my my car my car needs a good wash , by the way . grad f: ok . well , that th hey , if that 's what it takes , that 's fine with me . professor b: um . grad f: i 'll pick up your dry - cleaning , too . should we do digits ? professor b: yeah . grad f: uh . phd h: can i go next ? because i have to leave , actually . grad f: yep . go for it . hmm ! thanks . thank you . professor b: so you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling . right ? </s> [SEP]summarize the meeting
the meeting was mostly about the logistics of covering the legal bases around releasing meeting data . the team wanted to make sure that meeting participants would not sue for libel or releasing unwanted information . the team also went over the transcriptions that ibm had done as well as storage space , which was finally looking up . the meeting ended with a general discussion about the progress of the group and future directions .