Slashdot Log In
Researchers Work To Perfect Computerized Lip Reading
Posted by
Zonk
on Sunday January 20, @12:13AM
from the eee-aye-eee-aye-oh dept.
from the eee-aye-eee-aye-oh dept.
Iddo Genuth writes "Researchers at the University of East Anglia are working to develop computerized lip-reading systems. Lip-reading is extremely hard for humans to master, but a software-based system has several benefits over even the most highly trained expert. The ultimate goal of the project is to convert lip-read speech into text. 'Apart from being extremely helpful to hearing-disabled individuals, researchers say that such a system could be used to noiselessly dictate commands to electronic devices equipped with a simple camera - like mobile phones, microwaves or even a car's dashboard. England's Home Office Scientific Development Branch ... is currently investigating the feasibility of using lip-reading software as an additional tool for gathering information about criminals or for collecting evidence.'"
Related Stories
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading ... Please wait.

This could be a problem. (Score:4, Funny)
1: Go in the D pod with Frank.
2: Turn off sound.
3: Plan disconnection of HAL.
4: Leave D pod.
5: Check out slashdot's 7 year firehose backlog before executing your plans.
6: Get that sinking feeling of impending doom.
You could try... (Score:4, Funny)
3b. Hope HAL doesn't have the Klingon i18n package installed.
Or...
3a. XOR the output from HAL's camera with the output from the output from a chip manufacturing security camera. The AI porn'll distract HAL for long enough.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You sure you didn't step out the airlock?
Re:This could be a problem. (Score:4, Funny)
Bush Sr.? (Score:4, Funny)
-uso.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
HAL? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So much for blind gynecologists ... (Score:3, Funny)
... no more lip reading for them.
Let me be the first... (Score:5, Insightful)
Love affair with voice control (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyway, this gets me to privacy stuff. As computers try to understand us more, we'll need to interact in a more 'human' fashion - talking more, or doing things that would attract the attention of other humans (and also the computers). It's late, and I'm rambling here a bit, but remember how voice-controlled computers were going to take over a few years back? Everyone was just going to be talking to their computers to get stuff done. In reality, that would be a complete disaster in office environments, as there's generally too much noise already. Replacing all the typing you hear with voices. Ugh...
So, if I need to talk to a computer, but do it quietly, it can just read my lips, right? Or can I just mouth the words and have it understand that? I've found that when I try to 'mouth' words silently to someone across a room, I tend to exaggerate my mouth's movements, so perhaps that would be a better thing for the computers to be able to 'parse'.???
I see real application for this technology in niche areas, but am not sure it'll become 'mainstream' any time soon (like, 5-10 years). We'll need to rethink our physical world - offices, cars, and such - before these sorts of new HCI systems can really be integrated in to our day to day lives productively.
Why voice control doesn't work. (Score:2, Insightful)
Imagine trying to watch "Top Gun" in your DVD player ...
Maverick (Tom Cruise): "Eject eject eject!" ... (*bzzzzt* disk pops out of player).
Or "Law and Order"
Cop on TV: "Stop!" (*click* - TV turns off)
Victim on TV: "He shot her! Call 911!" (*beep b
Re: (Score:2)
Watching Trek I've often wondered why the computer didn't think people were talking to it every time the word "computer" came up in conversation.
Crazies everywhere (Score:2)
Well (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, it could also be used as a tool for additional unnecessary surveillance.
Obligatory meme (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't bother actually reading his lips
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Universal Translator (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But as an improvement over current computer voice recognition translators, yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Great! (Score:3, Funny)
Doctor: "I diagnose lip strain and recommend no kissing for 6 months."
Patient: "That's easy! I am a geek. I haven't kissed anyone since my aunt last visited me in 2001."
time (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Silent films given voice (Score:4, Interesting)
Already been done (Score:2, Informative)
Ventriloquism (Score:2, Funny)
HAL's way ahead of you. (Score:2)
HAL: Affirmative, Dave, I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as w
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Speech recognition uses (Score:3, Interesting)
Already Done for Noisy Environments (Score:2, Informative)
What's the real story? (Score:5, Informative)
TFA links to a paper that's actually about exaggerating lip motion to improve recognition, which seems like an interesting topic, at least new to me. But it's seemingly unrelated to the reporting or any governments protecting us from our rights.
From the Abstract:
Any ventriloquists care to comment? (Score:2)
Better keep a stiff lower lip, too (Score:3, Insightful)
Would it be asking too much to have this worded as "gathering information about possible criminals"? (Or "suspected" or "alleged" would be ok.) The text quoted above, which is absent such an adjective, comes straight out of the article, and may or may not be how the Home Office refers to it, but anyone engaged in public dialog on this matter (and preferrably those people when doing their research) should strive to be meticulous on this point.
As soon as one loses that little bit of description, one is able to be much more cavalier about the loss of human privacy involved. It's one thing to rough up terrorists at the airport--who doesn't want that? But "possible terrorists" is just a synonym for "everyone". So when we say it's ok to rough up possible terrorists, we're saying it's ok to rough up anyone. And we can learn to think twice about that. Likewise, when we say it's ok to surveil the lip movements of "potential terrorists", we're saying it's ok to log everyone's private conversations. So let's be clear about that.
Saying we're just watching the lip movements of criminals isn't right. If we knew they were criminals, we would (for the most part) be arresting them. (Yes, yes, we might sometimes leave them on the street to lead us to their friends. But I don't think that's the only use that this technology will be put to.)
And how long until someone's lip movements are taken as a confession. Or as a justification for an otherwise-illegal search? The word "not" doesn't involve much movement of the lips. Lip-reading "I did not kill him." could easily look like "I did kill him." Will we be telling people that in order to stay clear of these things, we need to be more clear about our lip movements, just in case they're misconstrued?
Perhaps a stiff upper lip will give way evolutionarily to stiffening of both lips when talking, just as a form of personal protection. How sad. And worse if, as seems likely, dedicated criminals eventually learn the skill of not moving their lips while talking, and so that really only non-criminals become usefully tracked this way. Or perhaps it will become suspicious when one doesn't move one's lips, as it's probably inappropriately regarded by law enforcement as suspicious when one encrypts things. Then there will be the uncomfortable choice between hiding your communications and looking suspicious, or exposing your communications to misperception.
The data is out there. Lips convey meaning. So it's inevitable that this technology will occur. But the uses to which it may reasonably be put are in control of the people--at least in countries where the people have some say in government. Let's hope they build up some reasonable guidelines on appropriate vs inappropriate uses quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
I myself, though no Islamist, wear a full set of facial hair, since I can n
No more shouting at your computer (Score:2)
England's Home Office? (Score:2)
Human language is too complicated (Score:2)
Countermeasures (Score:2)
2) If both parties are aware of such devices and are prepared they could move their lips to mouth decoy words and only vocalize the non-decoy words to carry th
Lip reading is not purely science (Score:2)
There have been several cases in UK courts where lip reading of CCTV footage was used as evid
Read my lips: (Score:2)
...with knobs on top.
Convergence of technlogy. (Score:2)
Combine speech recognition, bionic contacts (http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/17/1921217), and this lipreading software, and you've got realtime captioning/subtitles for the deaf.
Yeah, right... (Score:2)
Good luck, guys.
Re: (Score:2)
Can anyone explain a reason why lip reading would be more effective than speech? I'd love to know.
Perhaps in some situations where video is available but not audio? That's the best I can come up with.