We are having an interesting issue with how the CVP handles an "ambiguous result" from Nuance. This is in Spanish for a prompt that asks the caller to input an eight character alpha-numeric account number.
In Spanish the names for the letters "V" and "B" are both pronounced "be" (using Nuance markups). Native speakers often get around this by saying "B larga" and "V corta" (long b, short v). Oddly, Nuance doesn't include those so we added them to the lexicon.
But our problem comes when callers just say "be". Then Nuance produces what is called an ambiguous result. In the Nuance log it looks like this. Notice that the result has two values v2226444 and b2226444.
RSLT={value:v2226444}#{value:b2226444}|RAWT=v dos dos dos seis cuatro cuatro cuatro#b dos dos dos seis cuatro cuatro cuatro|SPOK=v dos dos dos seis cuatro cuatro cuatro#b dos dos dos seis cuatro cuatro cuatro|GRMR=GURI0#GURI0|KEYS=<value conf="71">v2226444</value><SWI_confidence conf="0">0</SWI_confidence>|CONF=71|RAWS=-4015.408447
But here is what shows up in the CVP activity log for this. It takes the interpretation for one value and the utterance for the other. (And it's not consistent which letter shows up in which spot.)
... ,interaction,utterance,v dos dos dos seis cuatro cuatro cuatro
... ,interaction,interpretation,b2226444
This is not a grammar issue. The grammar tags V with V and B with B, not vice-versa!
We use the interpretation as the account number. But that would be invalid if it really starts with V. It would be easy enough to write a little code that tries both values. But there are account numbers than contain two or three instances of B or V which increases the number of possible permutations.
Nuance wouldn't be returning values like this if there weren't systems built to handle that kind of result. So does anyone know if there is a fix for this in the CVP?
