MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1984048000 · doi:10.1121/1.4831409

Acoustic features of upper necaxa totonac ejective fricatives

2013· article· en· W1984048000 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebekka Puderbaugh, Benjamin V. Tucker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormantDuration (music)AcousticsRealization (probability)Variation (astronomy)VowelSpeech recognitionMathematicsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to investigate the acoustic properties of a class of sounds known as ejective fricatives in Upper Necaxa Totonac (UNT), a Totonac-Tepehua language of northern Puebla, Mexico, and to relate these sounds to those in other languages. Ejective fricatives are an exceedingly rare class of sounds found in only a relatively small number of the world's languages. This study attempts to clarify the nature of the acoustic signal of these sounds in UNT, whose historical origins have been reconstructed as former fricative plus glottal stop clusters [Beck, 2006, Univ. of Alberta Working Papers, 1], use the acoustic data to verify whether these segments are in fact canonical ejectives and propose future directions for further research. Analyses of the segments in question include duration and center of gravity of the fricative portions, presence or absence of any periods of silence surrounding the segments, durations of such silences, and effects on pitch, amplitude, duration, and formants of neighboring vowels. Due to the variable nature of the realization of laryngeal phonemes in UNT, pitch, amplitude, and voice quality of both preceding and following vowels were analyzed as well.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→