I find the HMM approach difficult to fully understand, but obviously I lack the necessary mathematical background. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. seems much clearer to me: divide the set of all symbols into two classes (1 and 0), so that the number of consecutive symbols alternating between the two classes is maximized. This also results in what seems to me an intuitive quality measure: how many of the pairs of consecutive symbols correspond to an alternation (you want to have many 10 and 01 and as few 11 and 00 as possible).
Could someone please explain in simple words why an HMM approach is better?
Also, in Acedo's approach, I am not convinced of the meaningfulness of treating space as a symbol, together with characters. We want to classify symbols as vowels or consonants, and obviously "space" has nothing to do with sounds. Only considering consecutive characters "inside" words (as Hulden and Sukhotin do) seems to me the most sensible thing.
Could someone please explain in simple words why an HMM approach is better?
Also, in Acedo's approach, I am not convinced of the meaningfulness of treating space as a symbol, together with characters. We want to classify symbols as vowels or consonants, and obviously "space" has nothing to do with sounds. Only considering consecutive characters "inside" words (as Hulden and Sukhotin do) seems to me the most sensible thing.