Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to fill a need for experimental-acoustic baseline measurements of Canadian English vowels, a database is currently being constructed in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The database derives from multiple repetitions of fifteen English vowels (eleven standard monophthongs, syllabic /r/ and three standard diphthongs) in /hVd/ and /hVt/ contexts, as spoken by multiple speakers. Frequencies of the first four formants are taken from three timepoints in every vowel token (25, 50, and 75% of vowel duration). Preliminary results (from five men and five women) confirm some features characteristic of Canadian English, but call others into question. For instance the merger of low back vowels appears to be complete for these speakers, but the result is a lower-mid and probably rounded vowel rather than the low back unround vowel often described. With these data Canadian Raising can be quantified as an average 200 Hz or 1.5 Bark downward shift in the frequency of F1 before voiceless /t/. Analysis of the database will lead to a more accurate picture of the Canadian English vowel system, as well as provide a practical and up-to-date point of reference for further phonetic and sociophonetic comparisons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".