Perceptual, durational and tongue displacement measures following articulation therapy for rhotic sound errors
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
Outcomes of articulation therapy for rhotic errors are usually assessed perceptually. However, our understanding of associated changes of tongue movement is limited. This study described perceptual, durational and tongue displacement changes over 10 sessions of articulation therapy for /ɹ/ in six children. Four of the participants also received ultrasound biofeedback of their tongue shape. Speech and tongue movement were recorded pre-therapy, after 5 sessions, in the final session and at a one month follow-up. Perceptually, listeners perceived improvement and classified more productions as /ɹ/ in the final and follow-up assessments. The durations of VɹV syllables at the midway point of the therapy were longer. Cumulative tongue displacement increased in the final session. The average standard deviation was significantly higher in the middle and final assessments. The duration and tongue displacement measures illustrated how articulation therapy affected tongue movement and may be useful for outcomes research about articulation 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.
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 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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