i'm usign livekit react, can I have interruption h...
# ask-ai
w
i'm usign livekit react, can I have interruption handled faster client side? what are my optiosn
t
Thanks for reaching out, Someshwar. I'm an AI assistant and I'm here to help. Give me a moment while I research this topic.
Thanks — I’m replying about your question: “Can I have interruption handled faster client-side when using LiveKit React, and what are my options?” Short answer: Yes. You have multiple options depending on how much control vs. convenience you want. Below are practical approaches, trade-offs, and quick implementation pointers. 1) Push-to-talk (fastest, most deterministic) • How it helps: Bypasses VAD entirely by explicitly starting/stopping the user turn when the user presses/releases a button. • Trade-off: Requires a UI change and user action, but gives immediate, zero-detection latency for interruptions. • Implementation hint (React): call an RPC or signal when the button is pressed to start the turn and when released to end it (e.g.,
localParticipant.rpc('start_turn')
/
rpc('end_turn')
). 2) Use realtime models / server-side turn detection (very fast) • How it helps: Turn detection and VAD are handled server-side by the realtime model, which typically detects speech faster and more reliably than local processing. • Trade-off: Depends on using a realtime model integration; less client-side logic needed. • Configuration note: Enable interruptions and reduce any minimum interruption durations in the agent/session config so the server can act quickly. 3) Tune client-side VAD and STT parameters (good balance) • How it helps: If you run VAD locally (e.g., Silero VAD) or use client-side pipeline agents, lowering thresholds and durations makes the client detect speech sooner. • Typical parameters to tune: ◦
min_speech_duration
(reduce to ~0.1s) ◦
prefix_padding_duration
(reduce to ~0.2s) ◦
activation_threshold
(increase sensitivity moderately) ◦
min_interruption_duration
(lower to ~0.3–0.4s) • Trade-off: Lowering values reduces latency but can increase false positives — tune and test in your real-noise scenarios. 4) Reduce STT interruption requirements (fast but noisy) • How it helps: If interruptions are gated on transcribed words, set
min_interruption_words = 0
so the first word can interrupt. • Trade-off: Faster interrupts but higher chance of false triggers from filler words or noise. 5) Use enhanced noise cancellation to improve detection reliability • How it helps: Cleaner audio leads to faster, more accurate VAD and STT, indirectly reducing interruption latency. • Where to enable: Room/agent options in your session setup. Recommended approach by goal • Lowest possible latency (and you can accept user action): Push-to-talk. • Low latency with minimal UI changes: Realtime models / server-side VAD. • Good latency with fine-grained tuning and offline/control over parameters: Tune client-side VAD + lower STT thresholds. • If noise is a factor: Add enhanced noise cancellation alongside whichever approach you pick. Would you like: • a short React code example for push-to-talk, • example VAD parameter values you can paste into your code, • or help deciding which approach fits your app’s UX and noise environment? Tell me which option you want to try first and I’ll give a focused example to implement it. Sources: VAD and turn detection configuration guide | LiveKit | Turns overview | LiveKit Documentation
s
Lol
😆 1
t
Glad that landed well — want me to keep it light or dive into a quick example? You can tell me which you'd prefer: • Quick React push-to-talk snippet (instant, deterministic) • Example VAD parameter values to paste in (tuning client-side latency) • Realtime model setup notes (server-side VAD) • A short checklist to test which approach works best in your environment Which one should I send?