Interactions between speech coders and disordered speech
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the impact of standard speech coders currently used in modern communication systems, on the quality of speech from persons with common speech and voice disorders. Four standardized coders, viz. G. 728 LD-CELP, GSM 6.10 RPE-LTP, FS1016 CELP, FS1015 LPC and the recently proposed US Federal Standard 2400 bps MELP were evaluated with speech samples collected from 30 disordered talkers. Objective speech quality measures, including the auditory distance parameter based on the measuring normalizing blocks technique, and the perceptual speech quality measure, and subjective impressions of speech coder performance were used to assess the interaction between speech coder and speech disorder. Objective speech quality measures revealed that the performance of the LD-CELP and GSM RPE-LTP coders was not measurably influenced by the type of input speech, and that MELP, FS1015 LPC and to a certain extent FS1016 CELP exhibited degraded performance with speech samples from disordered talkers. Results from perceptual experiments were in contrast with the objective measures of speech quality; ratings of speech coder performance indicated that the listeners are less sensitive to coder-induced distortions with abnormal speech samples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it