MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964531574 · doi:10.1121/1.2945116

Experimental investigation of the influence of a posterior gap on glottal flow and sound

2008· article· en· W1964531574 on OpenAlexaff
Jong Beom Park, Luc Mongeau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody orificeAcousticsDischarge coefficientMaterials scienceReynolds numberSound pressureAirflowJet (fluid)Oscillation (cell signaling)MechanicsFlow (mathematics)Orifice platePhysicsNozzleThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of a posterior gap on the airflow through the human glottis was investigated using a driven synthetic model. Instantaneous orifice discharge coefficient of a glottal shaped orifice was obtained from the time-varying orifice area and the velocity distribution of the pulsated jet measured on the axial plane using a single hot-wire probe. Instantaneous orifice discharge coefficient values were found to undergo a cyclic hysteresis loop when plotted versus Reynolds number and time, indicating a pressure head increase and a net energy transfer from the air flow to the orifice wall. The net energy transferred was estimated to be around 10% of the value presumably required to achieve self-sustained oscillation. The radiated sound pressure was measured to characterize the influence of the minimum flow through the posterior gap on the broadband component of the radiated sound. The presence of a posterior gap was found to significantly increase the broadband sound level produced over the frequency range in which human hearing is most sensitive.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207