MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085319961 · doi:10.3109/02699206.2011.599472

An ultrasonographic investigation of cleft-type compensatory articulations of voiceless velar stops

2011· article· en· W2085319961 on OpenAlexafffund
Tim Bressmann, Bojana Radovanović, Gajanan V. Kulkarni, Paula Klaiman, David M. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Linguistics & Phonetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsArticulation (sociology)PsychologyCovertManner of articulationAudiologyPlace of articulationTonguePerceptionSpeech recognitionMedicineLinguisticsComputer scienceConsonantVowel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasound imaging was used to investigate the articulation of the voiceless velar stop [k] in five speakers with compensatory articulation related to cleft palate. The perceptual evaluation of the acoustic realization and the visual assessment of the tongue movement for the target sound were made by three examiners. The analysis revealed a variety of different compensatory strategies that included glottal stops, pharyngeal stops, midpalatal stops and glottal and velar co-productions. One patient produced palatal click sounds together with a midpalatal stop. The ultrasound imaging also revealed covert articulatory movements that would have been missed in a purely perceptual analysis. The analysis of the ultrasound images points to subphonemic aspects of cleft-type compensatory articulation that are important to understand for speech therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Linguistics & PhoneticsSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207