MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129269533

VARIABLE PRE-EMPHASIS LPC FOR MODELING VOCAL EFFORT IN THE SINGING VOICE

2006· article· en· W2129269533 on OpenAlexaff
Karl I. Nordstrom, Peter F. Driessen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormantSpectral envelopeSpeech recognitionComputer scienceEnvelope (radar)SingingPhonationFilter (signal processing)Linear predictive codingVoice analysisBreathy voiceAcousticsSpeech processingVowelTelecommunicationsAudiologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In speech and singing, the spectral envelope of the glottal source varies according to different voice qualities such as vocal effort, lax voice, and breathy voice. In contrast, linear prediction coding (LPC) models the glottal source in a way that is not flexible. The spectral envelope of the source estimated by LPC is fixed and determined by the pre-emphasis filter. In standard LPC, the formant filter captures variation in the spectral envelope that should be associated with the source. This paper presents variable preemphasis LPC (VPLPC) as a technique to allow the estimated source to vary. This results in formant filters that remain more consistent across variations in vocal effort and breathiness. VPLPC also provides a way to change the envelope of the estimated source, thereby changing the perception of vocal effort. The VPLPC algorithm is used to manipulate some voice excerpts with promising but mixed results. Possible improvements are suggested. 1.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207