MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028422150 · doi:10.1121/1.2933492

Chest wall dynamics and respiratory muscle recruitment during flute playing

2008· article· en· W2028422150 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Cossette, Pierpaolo Monaco, Andréa Aliverti, Peter T. Macklem

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusicians’ Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParasternal linePlethysmographFluteRib cageMedicineAnatomyAcousticsCardiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusicians’ Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207