Feed-forward control of phonetic gestures in consonant–vowel syllables: Evidence from responses to auditory startle.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech production like other limb movements relies on both feed-forward and feedback mechanisms. Use of a startling auditory stimulus (>90 dB) has been shown to trigger fast, accurate feed-forward performances in upper limb movements prior to access to feedback information [Valls-Solé et al. (1999), J. Physiol. 516: 931–938; Carlsen et al. (2004), J. Mot. Behav. 36: 253–264]. This startle paradigm is applied to test whether pre-programed, feed-forward speech production differs in phonetic detail from production with access to feedback. The experiment examined the production of the CV syllable [ba], starting with the mouth either open or closed. This speech production was triggered either by a control stimulus (82 dB) or by a startling stimulus (124 dB). Results from ten participants showed that lip compression occurred for both starting conditions (mouth open and mouth closed), and also indicated that the timing relationships of the articulators were stable across control trials and startle trials. The acoustics of syllables, formant values, and maximum amplitudes, were consistent across control trials and startle trials, suggesting that the production of pre-programmed gestural configurations in CV syllables may be executed under exclusively feed-forward control.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".