Invalidity dossier

US 5799277

Acoustic model generating method for speech recognition

Current assignee: Victor Company of Japan Ltd

Added 9/24/2026, 12:51:24 AM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview — US 5,799,277 A

Title: Acoustic model generating method for speech recognition

Patent number / application: US 5,799,277 A (application US 08/547,794)

Assignee: Victor Company of Japan, Ltd. (original assignee listed); inventor Junichi Takami

Key dates (as listed): Priority 1994-10-25; filed 1995-10-25; granted/published 1998-08-25; anticipated expiration 2015-10-25; status "Expired – Fee Related."

Purpose and plain-language scope: The patent addresses speech recognition using hidden Markov models (HMMs). Its stated aim is to generate acoustic models with high representation efficiency — a "soft state network structure" representing maximum acoustic phenomena at high precision and robust stability — by deciding, under optimum conditions, the model unit, states of signal sources, state-sharing structure, and signal-source parameters, so that maximum speech phenomena are modeled with the minimum possible model parameters.

The claimed method iteratively performs splitting or merging on at least one signal source of an initial model, selecting one processing successively to form multiple signal sources, until the number of generated signal sources reaches a predetermined value for optimum speech recognition. When that number is reached, it decides — under a common evaluation criterion — the phoneme context category of the model unit, the number of states per model, sharing of states among models, sharing of signal sources among states, and the shape of each output probability distribution.

Merging may combine two similar signal sources into one without losing precision; it may calculate synthesized distribution magnitude and merge the pair with minimum distribution. Merging may precede splitting and is adopted only if its evaluation value (e.g., sum total likelihood) exceeds that of already-obtained models with the same number of signal sources; otherwise it is discarded and splitting is re-run. Splitting may split a source into two, allocate the original's two mixture distributions, and copy self/successor transition probabilities. Three splitting options are described: splitting two signal sources and reconstructing their shared structure; splitting one state into two phoneme-context states; and splitting one state into two time-direction states — with selection based on maximum likelihood.

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5799277/en

What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text is explicitly marked as excerpted (e.g., FIG. 4 description and later portions are omitted), so it does not provide the full specification, the exact wording or count of claims, all drawing contents, or the detailed flowchart steps. It also does not establish examination history, actual claim scope as allowed, or the accuracy of listed dates, which the source itself labels assumptions.

Generated 10/1/2026, 9:31:43 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5799277. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Proceedings on file (0)

All PTAB activity →

AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.

PTAB challenges

AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Assignment history

Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.