MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2075956534 · doi:10.1121/1.4788561

<b>A model of invariant patterns of articulatory movements</b>

2005· article· en· W2075956534 on OpenAlexaff
Patrizia Bonaventura

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsOutlierPolynomialWeightingInvariant (physics)Mathematical analysisStatisticsPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the present study is to model the ‘‘iceberg’’ portions of the demisyllables, previously extracted from the microbeam articulatory data (Bonaventura, 2003), by curve fitting. The polynomial analysis was designed to include an appropriate weighting window centering around the threshold crossing point, and aimed to provide an estimate of how, in the vicinity of the crossing point, the curve deviates from a straight line: this deviation would be represented by the higher order coefficients of the polynomial. The model was obtained preliminarily on the basis of 100 curves for the lower lip movement for /f/ and /v/ (in initial and final demisyllable for ‘‘five’’), and from 100 curves for the tongue tip displacement (for /n/ in ‘‘nine’’). In order to fit the data to the model, a robust least square method (Least Absolute Residuals) has been used, in order to minimize the influence of the outliers, that are present in the read speech data, and cannot be accounted for by ‘‘phrase final lengthening effects.’’ The fit results for the cubic polynomials satisfactorily approximated the ‘‘iceberg’’ curves. The 95% confidence bounds on the fitted coefficients indicated that they were acceptably accurate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→