MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2093092240 · doi:10.1121/1.4787829

How the pharyngeal resonator is controlled articulatorily

2005· article· en· W2093092240 on OpenAlexaffabout
John H. Esling

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlottisLarynxArticulatorPharynxPhonationVocal tractAnatomyTongueEpiglottisMedicineAcousticsOrthodonticsAudiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous languages of North America, especially west coast Vancouver Island Nuuchahnulth and Interior BC Salish, illustrate an extensive range of use of the pharyngeal resonator. The pharynx is classified as part of the laryngeal articulator (rather than lingual) because the laryngeal constrictor mechanism (controlling changes from the glottis to the aryepiglottic folds) is the principal articulator whose movements determine the shape of the pharynx. The Nuuchahnulth (Nootka) dialects (e.g., Ahousaht) and Thompson, Moses-Columbia, and Spokane/Kalispel Salish varieties all close the larynx completely for the speech sound epiglottal stop. With the airway optimally shut, the pharynx is small; the aryepiglottic folds are pressed against the epiglottic tubercle, the tongue is retracted, and the larynx is raised. There are good indications that the thyroarytenoid, aryepiglottic, thyroepiglottic, hyoglossus and hyothyroid muscles participate in this buckling maneuvre. These languages also contain either a pharyngeal fricative or approximant (at the same place of articulation but with less stricture) and, in Thompson, also pharyngealized uvulars (with even less stricture). Pharyngeal resonance in all of these cases is dependent initially on the shortening of the supraglottic tube and subsequently on the combined effect of tongue retraction and larynx raising reducing the volume immediately above the supraglottic tube.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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