MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007368547 · doi:10.1121/1.4831408

An acoustic description of Chemehuevi

2013· article· en· W2007368547 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin V. Tucker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormantVowelStress (linguistics)LinguisticsLanguage familyAcousticsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemehuevi, a member of the Uto-Aztecan language family, is spoken along the Colorado River in both Arizona and California. The language is extremely endangered with fewer than five known speakers, all over the age of 50. Chemehuevi is classified following Miller et al. (2005) as a dialect of Colorado River Numic along with Southern Paiute and Ute. The present work offers a general description of the acoustic characteristics of the Chemehuevi phoneme inventory based on both an analysis of archival (3 female speakers recorded by: Major, 1969; Tyler, 1972; Press, 1973–1974) and current field recordings (1 male speaker recorded by: Penfield, Serratos, and Tucker, 2005–2006, 2010) of the language. To date, there is little acoustic analysis of Numic languages available. Vowel characteristics are analyzed by extracting duration and the first three formant frequencies. Consonants are also investigated using relevant acoustic measures (such as voice-onset time and centroid frequency). Additionally, the present acoustic analysis is compared to early descriptions of the phoneme inventory and provides evidence regarding the nature of the vowel inventory (is /e/ a phoneme), location of stress, idiolectal differences, and word final voiceless vowels.

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)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207