So it could be  I mean , Chuck and I had actually talked about this a couple times , and  and  over some lunches , I think ,  that , um ,  one thing that we might wanna do  The - there 's this question about , you know , what do you wanna scale ? Suppose y you can't adjust  these word insertion penalties and so forth , so you have to do everything at the level of the features. What could you do ? And , uh , one thing I had suggested at an earlier time was maybe some sort of scaling , some sort of root or  or something of the , um ,  uh , features. But the problem with that is that isn't quite the same , it occurred to me later , because what you really want to do is scale the , uh , @ @  the range of the likelihoods rather than
Nnn , the dist Yeah.
But ,  what might get at something similar , it just occurred to me , is kind of an intermediate thing  is because we do this strange thing that we do with the tandem system , at least in that system what you could do  is take the , um ,  uh , values that come out of the net , which are something like log probabilities , and scale those. And then , uh , um   then at least those things would have the right values or the right  the right range. And then that goes into the rest of it and then that 's used as observations. So it 's  it 's ,  um , another way to do it.
Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. But , these values are not directly used as probabilities anyway.