Effects of frequency shifts on the identification of vowels and words in sentences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of the effects of frequency shifts on vowel identification have shown a drop in accuracy when the spectrum envelope is shifted up or down, and when the fundamental frequency (F0) is raised or lowered. We have found an interaction between F0 and spectrum envelope shifts: Performance is better for vowels with matched shifts (both F0 and spectrum envelope shifted in the same direction) compared to mismatched shifts (F0 shifted up and spectrum envelope shifted down or vice versa). The aim of the present study was to determine the extent to which these effects persist in sentence context. The STRAIGHT vocoder was used to process a set of sentences from the HINT test using the same scale factors as in the vowel identification experiment. Word recognition scores generally followed the same pattern as vowel identification, with poorer performance for lowered F0 and raised spectrum envelope, and the lowest scores in conditions with high F0 and downward shifts in spectrum envelope, compared to the corresponding matched shifts. [Work supported by NSF and SSHRC.]
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".