Production-perception relationships during speech development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been shown that nonuniform growth of the supraglottal cavities, motor control development, and perceptual refinement shape the vowel systems during speech development. In this talk, we propose to investigate the role of perceptual constraints as a guide to the speakers task from birth to adulthood. Simulations with an articulatory-to-acoustic model, acoustic analyses of natural vowels, and results of perceptual tests provide evidence that the production-perception relationships evolve with age. At the perceptual level, results show that (i) linear combination of spectral peaks are good predictors of vowel targets, and (ii) focalization, defined as an acoustic pattern with close neighboring formants [J.-L. Schwartz, L.-J. Boe, N. Vallee, and C. Abry, J. Phonetics 25, 255–286 (1997)], is part of the speech task. At the production level, we propose that (i) frequently produced vowels in the baby’s early sound inventory can in part be explained by perceptual templates, (ii) the achievement of these perceptual templates may require adaptive articulatory strategies for the child, compared with the adults, to cope with morphological differences. Results are discussed in the light of a perception for action control theory. [Work supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.]
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 | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".