{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021400778210116732, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0038910505836575876, 'mean_word_length': 4.982558139534884, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Experimental Comparisons of Data Entry by Automated Speech Recognition, Keyboard, and Mouse

In a series of experiments isolated-word automated speech recognition (ASR) was compared with keyboard and mouse interfaces for three data entry tasks: textual phrase entry, selection from a list, and numerical data entry. To effect fair comparisons, the tasks were designed to minimize the transaction cycle for each input mode and data type, and the main comparisons used times from only correct data entries. With the hardware and software employed the results indicate that for inputting short phrases, ASR competes only if the typist's speed is below 45 words per minute. For selecting an item from a list, ASR offers an advantage only if the list length exceeds 15 items. For entering numerical data, ASR offers no advantage over keypad or mouse. An extrapolation to latency-free ASR suggests that even as hardware and software become faster, human factors will dominate and the results would shift only slightly in favor of ASR.