MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1956327089

Pattern recognition in speech perception research

2008· article· en· W1956327089 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Terrance M. Nearey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultinomial logistic regressionClosing (real estate)Logistic regressionCluster analysisSpeech recognitionPerceptionComputer scienceModalPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsArtificial intelligencePsychologyMathematicsMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of more flexible pattern recognition methods in speech perception research was investigated. The logistic regression and methods imported from automatic speech recognition (ASR) technology was included. The APP scores generated by a NAPP model was expressed in the form of a multinomial logistic regression (MNLR). An initial MNLR analysis was conducted and the response factor comprised the 6 response categories. The clustering patterns of consonant responses suggested a factored solution, whereby judgment log-odds were tuned continuously by only the three factors that include closing place, opening place, and gap duration. a reduced logistic model enforcing the decomposition shows RMS error and modal agreement that are nearly indistinguishable from the full CC model.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207