MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052130043 · doi:10.1121/1.3455876

Flow-induced vibratory response of idealized versus magnetic resonance imaging-based synthetic vocal fold models

2010· article· en· W2052130043 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill UniversityNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersBrigham Young University
KeywordsAcousticsVocal foldsMagnetic resonance imagingFold (higher-order function)VibrationMotion (physics)PhysicsComputer scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceMechanicsClassical mechanicsAnatomyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent vocal fold vibration studies have used models defined using idealized geometry. Although these models exhibit important similarities with human vocal fold vibration, some aspects of their motion are less than realistic. In this report it is demonstrated that more realistic motion may be obtained when using geometry derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. The dynamic response of both idealized and MRI-based synthetic vocal fold models are presented. MRI-based model improvements include evidence of mucosal wave-like motion and less vertical movement. Limitations of the MRI-based model are discussed and suggestions for further synthetic model development are offered.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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