robert said:
These appends seem to me to imply that diffing parallel/independently produced texts is a faster and more efficient way to correct the OCR process than sequential manual checking.
much faster. much more efficient.
Has anyone (possibly including DP) ever tried any of the above, and documented the results in a scientifically valid way?
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/bparchive?year=2005&
well, yeah. just one week from today, it will be 7 full years since i posted this: post=2005-10-03,3
Does DP work that way anyway?
nope. and they didn't want to learn, either. because, at the end of 2006, i posted this in a d.p. forum:
*** much faster. much more efficient. absolutely no comparison. it's a complete waste of time to proof by reading word-by-word. *** by now it should be clear to everyone why i am getting so tired of repeating myself. -bowerbird