fladhak/qmsum huggingface dataset:
Query: Summarize the whole meeting.
Answer: This meeting was the eleventh evidence session on the Children Abolition of Defense of Reasonable Publishment Wales Bill. Barry Hughes was there to answer questions related to the Bill. Six main topics that had been discussed or explained. The first one was how the Bill protected the children in terms of prosecutions. The second part explained the divergence between regions and the Bill's implication on England. The third part explained how the law was implemented, and the fourth talked about prosecutions and potential alternatives. Barry Hughes then further explained our-of-court disposals and responded to a specific infrastructure for these cases. In the last part, the meeting turned to discuss a number of unintended consequences related to the Bill.
Query: Summarize the discussion about the efficacy of the law.
Answer: Barry Hughes first stated that children had fewer rights than adults and therefore the law should be enforced to defend physical assault. As such social behavior was not available now, the law should change to reflect that. The discussion then turned to talk about the legal framework and its prosecution.
Query: What did Barry Hughes think about the legal framework when talking about the efficacy of the law?
Answer: Barry thought that the legal framework would make things clearer for parents and professionals. But when it came to prosecuting, there was a degree of confusion and some cases were in the grey areas.
Query: What was the two-stage test during prosecutions when discussing the efficacy of the law?
Answer: The first stage was to check whether there was sufficient evidence submitted by the police to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. Only if the first stage was satisfied, the second stage came to be considered, which was in the public interest.
Query: Summarize the discussion about the divergence between the law in England and Wales.
Answer: Barry Hughes indicated that the Bill would impact England and their people, although it needed a period. Moreover, Barry thought there was no cross-border issue from the potential legislation, and the draft changing to CPS guidance would not be helpful for scrutinisers to decide on the law in Wales.
Query: What did Barry Hughes think about the implications for implementing the Bill in Wales when talking about the divergence between the law in England and Wales?
Answer: Barry Hughes concluded two kinds of implications. First, the Bill would raise awareness for people from England who travel to Wales. Second, people in other areas might reflect on this defense as they did to the drink driving limit in Scotland.
Query: What did Barry Hughes think about draft changes to CPS guidance when talking about the divergence between the law in England and Wales?
Answer: Barry Hughes thought draft changes to CPS guidance would not necessarily be helpful to the scrutinisers, and simply wanted to take the present interest factors. Barry thought they needed to work for the principles of generality and a degree of specificity.
Query: Summarize the discussion about out-of-court disposals.
Answer: Barry Hughes introduced their cooperated organizations the National Police Chiefs' Council and their work on the out-of-court disposals. Then, Hughes and Vikki Howells talked about the possibility of creating a body of out-of-court disposals specific to the Bill. Lastly, there was a short discussion about the duty around awareness raising.
Query: How did the National Police Chiefs' Council help in out-of-court disposals?
Answer: The National Police Chiefs' Council was responsible for developing the police approach to out-of-court disposals and simplifying the range of out-of-court disposals.
Query: What did Barry Hughes think about the infrastructure of out-of-court disposals?
Answer: Barry Hughes thought that the infrastructure can be built for a range of out-of-court disposals. It might be built by the Welsh Government, the police, and crime commissioners.
Query: Summarize the discussion about unintended consequences.
Answer: Barry Hughes explained a number of unintended consequences questioned. The first one was about the isolated incidences in Wales, and the second came to the targets in terms of performance measure. The following concerns included malicious reporting, the European convention on human rights, low numbers of prosecutions, and a shortage of registered intermediaries.
Query: What did Barry Hughes think about the targets regarding performance measure?
Answer: Barry Hughes stated that they did not have targets and only prosecuted with reasonable prospects. As for the police, there were no targets for the police anymore, except for some individuals.
Query: What did Karen Cornish think about a shortage of registered intermediaries?
Answer: Karen Cornish thought it was a potential barrier but not a substantial barrier. The Ministry of Justice had taken action to deal with it and there had had a number of people in the positions. However, it was true that the work required larger recruitment.
Query: Summarize the whole meeting.
Answer: This is the fourth meeting of the design group. The group firstly introduced a prototype which contained the characteristics determined at the last meeting. Then Project Manager pointed out that since the production costs were over budget, they should reduce costs by leaving out solar cells, not using voice recognition and changing the button material into plastics. Then the group went through the evaluation criteria of the product. They thought the remote control should be fancy, innovative, easy to use, easy to find and spongy and evaluated the prototype with these criteria. When evaluating the project, the group considered that it was tempered by the choice of components and the price. Eventually, the group decided to redesign the product.
Query: Summarize the discussion about evaluation criteria of remote control.
Answer: The group thought the remote control should be fancy, innovative, easy to use, easy to find and spongy and evaluated the prototype with these criteria. Although they had brilliant ideas and designed a best remote control within their capacity, they just designed a product of high quality but low acceptance.
Query: Did the group think the remote control was easy to use when discussing evaluation criteria of the remote control?
Answer: User Interface believed that voice recognition was hard to learn while Industrial Designer argued that the remote control had two parts and everyone could use the basic part. He also pointed out that an advanced user would like to explore additional functions.
Query: Did the group think the remote control was competitive in the discussion of evaluation criteria of the remote control?
Answer: Marketing thought that the basic layout was mundane but the voice recognition was brilliant. User Interface added that it did not have the digits but had all the features a normal remote control had. Industrial Designer agreed but pointed out that they just design the best product within their capacity. Project agreed and concluded that it was of high quality but low acceptance.
Query: What did the group discuss about production costs of the product?
Answer: Project Manager revealed that it would cost 22 Euros at current standards so they should leave out some characteristics that could not add much value. Since it could be dull and simple without those characteristics, the group supposed that the selling price could be raised to 50 Euros.
Query: What did the group think about the reduction of production costs?
Answer: Project Manager revealed that it would be over budget so they had to make some changes. He proposed to reduce costs by leaving out solar cells and not using voice recognition. Then User Interface supposed that the buttons could be made of plastics and Industrial Designer proposed to make the remote control straight and simple.
Query: What did Industrial Designer propose in the discussion of production costs?
Answer: Since the prototype was over budget, Industrial Designer proposed to raise the selling price to 50 Euros. He thought it was not very expensive for a remote control that had this functionality.
Query: Summarize the whole meeting.
Answer: The meeting started by discussing the functional design of the remote control. Marketing gave the study on user needs and target groups. User Interface gave the presentation on technical effect design and Industrial Designer gave the presentation on working design. Then Project Manager initiated new project requirements brainstorming. The group had agreed on the on-call button design, DVD capability button design, power button design, and denied speech recognition design as well as mouse pad design. They would further discuss the function switch button and its compatibility in the next meeting.
Query: What did the group discuss the functional design on the remote control?
Answer: Project Manager stated the meeting topic on function design. Firstly, Marketing concluded a study on user needs, including buttons for channel selection according to the frequency of use and the relevance of each button, and suggested targeting on the nineteen to thirty-five years old age group to design functions. Next, User Interface presented on the technical effect on what functions users need and how to make the best functions for users. Then, Industrial Designer presented the working design, including input a channel or volume setting and output the location function to the television.
Query: What did the group discuss the finder button and call button?
Answer: At the first beginning of the discussion, Industrial Designer mentioned that it would be easy to implement something like a buzzer to trace the remote location. Project Manager suggested a two-part package - on one hand, users could click the button on the TV to send out the signal; on the other hand, the remote base could beep probably so that users could know where the remote control has gone.
Query: What did group members think of the speech recognition design suggested by Marketing?
Answer: Marketing suggested the speech recognition design is for user groups aged from nineteen to thirty-five. Industrial Designer supplemented the feature design that if the TV is on and somebody says like one, then the TV would switch itself to channel one. However, Project Manager illustrated that considering the budget, to have the speech recognition programmed in every single remote might be expensive. And this ended up was commonly agreed by other group mates.
Query: Summarize the discussion about the VCR / VHR / DVD capability button.
Answer: Project Manager mentioned that the group needed to decide on the VCR capabilities and answered Industrial Designer's question on whether VCRs were the same across the world. So Industrial Designer suggested a whole different set of buttons for individual VCRs. Project Manager suggested DVD type if considering the target group as young professionals and teenagers.
Query: Summarize the meeting
Answer: The meeting covered the issues with different kinds of mics, progress on the Aurora project, effectiveness of spectral subtraction, adding parameter to spectral coefficient, and studying energy in the data, along with a short discussion on student housing. The team thought that the LDA was doing well for the Aurora project, where the team had made good progress. The linear normalization was not as good. For spectral subtraction, the team discussed recreating data with FFT of combining the Weiner filtering with the signal subspace. The team had not made much progress on using spectral coefficients for voice-unvoice. The current approach was to study the variance, so other ideas were suggested. The meeting ended with a short discussion on student housing and a graduate student's interest in studying energy.
Query: Summarize the discussion about microphone issues
Answer: The professor pointed out that the lapel microphones were too close, so they were not good representative microphones. There was strong agreement that mics capture breath and other non-voice sounds since they were common.
Query: What did PhD F think about computational resources?
Answer: PhD F explained that he mistakenly had run his tasks on all the available compute instances. There was not enough computational resources going around. New computers were coming soon, but people would have to learn to share until then. It was important not to saturate computational resources. He also told the team how to properly queue tasks.
Query: What did the professor say about the workshop?
Answer: The professor recalled that at a workshop at Hopkins or Rutgers, twenty-five participants were running their tasks on twenty-five machines. Things would have been better if they ran tasks on their own machine. He was adding to PhD F's remarks on students in the team doing a similar thing.
Query: Summarize the discussion about spectral subtraction
Answer: The team was doing spectral subtraction with both scaling and GGT bins. There were pros and cons to both approaches. The professor suggested a simple spectral subtraction followed by a KL transformation. He also suggested using JRASTRA's technique which relied on adding some noise to get rid of noise. The team also suggested VTS techniques.
Query: What did the team say about the person in Grenada?
Answer: PhD D brought up a VTS technique to do voice-unvoice which was developed by Jose Carlos Segura, who is a person from Grenada. The professor did not know him, but the inspiration for the VTS had come from CMU.
Query: What did the professor think about the Wiener filter?
Answer: The professor could not see the advantage in combining the Wiener filter and the subspace. He later understood it would be a simple spectral subtraction, followed by a KL transform, followed by a Wiener filter.
Query: What were the topics talked about in the meeting?
Answer: The group discussed recording equipment issues, including the purchase of two additional headsets and the prospect of getting a new base station and a set of wireless microphones to replace those wired microphones currently in use. Speaker fe008 presented the current status on transcriptions, and explained procedures for cleaning up transcripts and ensuring they conform with set conventions. Speaker mn014 briefly described his efforts to normalize loudness levels across speech channels to distinguish between foreground and background speech. Finally, the group discussed legal and procedural issues concerning the provision of transcripts to meeting participants for 'bleeping out' any sections of speech they want excluded from the Meeting Recorder database.
Query: What was said about the equipment?
Answer: The group discussed recording equipment issues, including the purchase of two additional headsets and the prospect of getting a new base station and a set of wireless microphones to replace those wired microphones currently in use.
Query: What did the team say about recording conventions?
Answer: Efforts will be made to ensure that recording conventions are consistent across ICSI, the University of Washington, and SRI.
Query: What’s the current state of transcriptions?
Answer: Approximately 32-35 hours of meeting data have been recorded, roughly 30 hours of which comprise non-digits recordings. The transcribers have begun performing digit extraction (see abstract for Bmr013) and should be finished within a few days. Approximately 11 hours of speech have been transcribed.
Query: What was needed for the transcripts?
Answer: Efforts by speaker fe008 are in progress to ensure that transcripts are clean (i.e. spell checked), channelized, and conform to set conventions regarding the coding of numbers, acronyms, and explicit comments (e.g. door slams, coughs, and laughter). Subsequent efforts by speaker fe008 will be to tighten up boundaries on the time bins. Inter-annotator agreement was reported to be very good. Speaker mn014's multi-channel speech/non-speech segmenter is in use.
Query: Summarize the whole meeting.
Answer: The group members mainly talked about the details of the belief-net framework. They first discussed the way to make the definition of user and situation clear and set up the standards, e.g., user thrift, based on user's budget. Then they turned to the discussion about endpoint decision. They mentioned approaches including setting features/modes of like selling, fixing and exhibiting, and this inspired the group members to design user compatibility nodes of which value would depend on the user status and situation. They further discussed Go-there decision, which is related to the previous idea using the similar set of the ontologies. Finally, they shifted the topic to different probability computation methods for belief-nets and thought of solutions to issues with limited data annotation.
Query: Summarize the discussion about value for user and situation models.
Answer: First, Grad E proposed a question about better discriminating the definition of user and situation models, and it was necessary to set values for the models. Then, they discussed the issues in terms of the user's running budget, which was vital for the outcome of decisions. They tried to design a set of terms to describe the user's financial policy, such as thrift, average, spendy, or more finer scale ones.
Query: What did the group members think of the value of user budget when discussing value for user and situation models?
Answer: The reason why they mentioned user budget was that they wanted to take this example to further discuss the value for user model. Also, user budget was an important factor for the outcomes of decisions. Then, they tried to decide which set of words could represent the budget better. Finally, they found that the words that could describe financial policy of users, such as user thrift, was appropriate.
Query: Summarize the discussion about Go-there decision.
Answer: Grad E proposed the idea that Go-there decision was also worth thinking about. Professor B suggested that the decision could stick to the discourse properties as a placeholder. With regard to the lack of ontologies, Professor B thought that it could use the same properties like exhibiting and selling. Grad E doubted the choice of binary EVA values, but Professor B insisted that it was still necessary to make this choice. Then the group members discussed the layout of belief-nets, for example, the connection between Go-there nodes and other ones such as endpoints. And Professor B reminded me that the belief-nets should not have loops.
Query: What did Grad E say when discussing Go-there decision?
Answer: Grad E first started the topic about Go-there decision, and then proposed the question about how to represent discourse. Though Professor B insisted on using true-and-false values, Grad E challenged Professor B's opinion by taking examples about whether people really wanted to go some place or not when they asked how to get there.
Query: Summarize the discussion about probability computation.
Answer: Professor B first emphasized the necessity of combining influences mathematically and asked Grad D to further explain the potential solutions. Then the students discussed the computation methods including weighted combination and mixture of experts, based on the mechanism of belief-nets. But there was no consensus on which method should be applied in belief-nets.
Query: What did Grad D say about mixture of experts when discussing probability computation?
Answer: Grad D first said that different experts were reliable in different situations and it was necessary to organically combine them to make the network adapt to diverse situations. The network could be divided into several parts and the network would decide which of the experts would be trusted in this particular situation. Grad D then answered other group members' questions about the layout of mixture of expert models and their detailed computation process.
Query: Summarize the whole meeting.
Answer: This was a functional design meeting. Based on the presentations of the user interface designer, the industrial designer and the marketing expert, the project manager concluded that the new remote control should be powerful, easy to use, fashionable, recognizable, only for television and Internet-connected. After discussing the industrial design of the product, the group reached the agreement to design an infrared-based controller with less buttons but whether the product would be wireless was still unsolved. As for the product appearance, the group decided to make the product look fancy and recognizable; nevertheless, they had different opinions on the colour of the product.
Query: Summarize the discussion about product requirements.
Answer: Based on the presentations of the user interface designer, the industrial designer and the marketing expert which were about the product requirements, the project manager concluded that the new remote control should be powerful, easy to use, fashionable, recognizable and only for television. Furthermore, the remote control should use the Internet rather than teletext due to the spread of the Internet.
Query: What did the user interface designer and the industrial designer recommend to do when discussing the product requirement and why?
Answer: The user interface designer recommended to design a Google TV controller because Google was very successful for its powerful functions and friendly user interface. Also, to make the customers able to use the product without learning the manual, the industrial designer suggested applying some international standards such as some pictograms.
Query: Summarize the discussion about the Internet connection.
Answer: The industrial designer expressed concern about how to connect TV to the Internet and the user interface designer said a set box would enable TV to surf the Internet. However, the technology was not very popular, which might be an obstacle for global usage of the product.
Query: Summarize the discussion about the industrial design of the product.
Answer: The group reached the agreement to design an infrared-based controller because it was cheaper than a laser. Secondly, the industrial designer preferred a wireless remote control as it was easier to manage but the suggestion was doubted by the marketing and the project manager considering the cost and user requirements. Another thing was about the buttons. The marketing advised having less buttons because only ten percent of the buttons were actually in use and people tended to zap a lot.
Query: Why did the project manager disagree with the industrial designer when talking about whether to have a wireless control?
Answer: Firstly, the industrial designer said the wireless technology would cost 8 Euros which was higher than the manager's expectation. Secondly, whether the users would like to have a wireless control or not was unknown and the marketing would go to figure it out. Finally, having a link between the remote control and the television would prevent control from losing.
Query: What did the user interface designer recommend to do when discussing the problem of having less buttons?
Answer: The industrial designer recommended mixing several functions in one button by having a switch menu. For example, the category the functions into several classes and link switch menu to this kind of this category of functions.
Query: Summarize the discussion about product appearance.
Answer: Based on earlier experiments and questionnaires, the marketing found that seventy-five percent of the users thought most remote controls ugly. Thus, the group decided to make the product look fancy so that people would pay more. However, how to make remote control look fancy was a big problem because different people have different opinions about fancy. What's more, the project manager thought the product should be recognizable and attractive.
Query: What was the opinion of the user interface designer and the industrial designer towards the product appearance?
Answer: They thought in order to make the product look fancy, the product should have many colours instead of having one grey standard to meet different customers' needs.