MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259055876 · doi:10.1109/newcas.2011.5981212

Accurate estimation of the glottal flow derivative using iteratively reweighted 1-norm minimization

2011· article· en· W2259055876 on OpenAlexaff
M. Lankarrany, Wei‐Ping Zhu, M.N.S. Swamy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinificationVocal tractComputer scienceNorm (philosophy)AlgorithmDerivative (finance)ResidualMathematicsSpeech recognitionMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of estimating the exact shape of the glottal flow derivative (GFD) using reweighted 1-norm minimization of the second derivative of the GFD is addressed in this paper. By using physiological models of the glottal flow derivative, such as the Liljencrants-Fant (LF) and Rosenberg models, it is intuitively found that the second derivative of those models is highly sparse. Based on this observation an iteratively reweighted 1-norm minimization algorithm is proposed to accurately estimate the vocal tract of the speech signal by exploiting the sparsity of the second derivative of the GFD (the residual of the linear prediction model). An experimental study using a data set of 40 vowels /a/ and /e/, 20 for each, is conducted, showing the efficiency, in terms of the number of iterations and the total run-time reduction, of the proposed algorithm. Furthermore, the results of estimating the GFD of two vowels /a/ & /e/ using Joint Source-Filter Model Optimization and our proposed method, demonstrate the accuracy, in terms of similarity to the physiological model and precise synthesis, of our proposed algorithm.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207