Numerical Assessment of the Quasi-Steady Approximation in Glottal Air Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Voice production involves air flow through the glottis and its interaction with the deformable vocal folds. The quasi-steady approximation involves modeling the complex unsteady flow through the glottis as a sequence of steady flows through rigid orifices, which is numerically less expensive. Theoretical and experimental assessments of the quasi-steady approximation have been attempted, but contradictions in previously reported results prompt further analysis. To investigate the validity of the quasi-steady approximation, a two-dimensional dynamic simulation of air flow through an idealized glottal orifice with moving walls was performed for different pressure gradients and oscillation frequencies. A series of steady flow simulations for configurations of the vocal folds and flow boundary conditions that instantaneously coincide with data from the dynamic simulations were performed. Dynamic and static simulations were performed using the COMSOL multiphysics® software. Both stationary and non-stationary geometries were created based on the M5 model with the orifice profile alternating between convergent and divergent included angles (−40° to 40°). The distance between the vocal cord tip and the centerline was established to maintain a constant vocal fold volume, thereby eliminating spurious monopole sources. The results include the fluid flow rate, the pressure drop across the glottis, the shear stress on the glottis walls, and the orifice coefficient. Comparison between these variables for both dynamic and static sets of data allowed the assessment of the accuracy of the quasi-steady approximation to predict the fluid flow in the glottis. The importance of time-dependent terms over short intervals during glottal opening and closure was scrutinized. The results may contribute to the general goal of creating flow models that are optimal for laryngeal orifice coefficient and sound pressure determination.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".