MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345462656 · doi:10.1121/1.4950056

Evaluating how fine-grained changes in the spatial and temporal properties of audiovisual speech influence the perception of linguistic meter

2016· article· en· W2345462656 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Fuhrman, Stanisław Nowak, Eric Vatikiotis‐Bateson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionComputer scienceSpeech perceptionIntelligibility (philosophy)Speech recognitionSpeech processingOffset (computer science)Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The visual information that contributes to speech perception has been known for over a half century (Sumby and Pollack, JASA, 1954). More recent work has demonstrated two important constraints on the benefit of visual information to speech perception. First, the benefit patterns with temporal constraints on general audiovisual sensory processing, and degrades when auditory and visual signals are misaligned by an offset on the order of the duration of a syllable. Second, studies have demonstrated that low spatiotemporal frequency visual information is sufficient for boosting speech intelligibility. Collectively, these findings suggest that visual information facilitates processing of linguistic information organized in the speech stream primarily at the level of the syllable. Our experiments address how manipulation of the phasing and amplitude of visual components of the audiovisual stream associated with reiterant speech affects the perception of linguistic stress. Our analyses focus on determining the sensitivity of speech perception to changes in the fine-grained structure of visible motion (kinematics) and its alignment with the speech acoustics.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207