Chest wall dynamics and respiratory muscle recruitment during flute playing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Respiratory parameters and sound were recorded during professional flute playing in order to assess what physiological processes were associated with the control of sound production that results in 'breath support' which in turn is associated with high quality playing. Four standing young professional flautists played flute excerpts with different technical requirements with and without breath support. Recordings included optoelectronic plethysmographic measurements of chest wall volume (Vcw) and its compartments, surface electromyography of the scalene, lateral abdominal, rectus abdominus, parasternal and sternocleidomastoid muscles, mouth pressure, and sound. Flow was estimated from differentiating Vcw during playing. Comparison in between various types of playing were performed. Results showed that flute support entails antagonistic contraction of non-diaphragmatic inspiratory muscles that tends to hold the rib cage at higher lung volume during long legato phrase playing. This relieves the expiratory muscles from the task of producing the right mouth pressure, especially at the end of the phrases, so they can contribute more to the finer control of mouth pressure modulations required for high quality playing.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".