MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2346648028 · doi:10.1121/1.4950628

Acoustic analysis of Punjabi stress and tone (Doabi dialect)

2016· article· en· W2346648028 on OpenAlexaff
Kiranpreet Nara

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllableTone (literature)Stress (linguistics)RhymeDuration (music)Mandarin ChineseAcousticsFalling (accident)AudiologyMathematicsSpeech recognitionPsychologyLinguisticsComputer sciencePhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An acoustic experiment was conducted to study the stress and tone systems of Punjabi, an under-documented Indo-Aryan language. Tone and stress are linked because tone associates with the stressed syllable (Bailey, 1914; Wells and Roach, 1980; Baart, 2003). The experiment was used determine the acoustic cues of stress and the tonal contours of the three Punjabi tones: default, rising, and falling. Five native speakers read a list of 85 words five times. Measurements of duration, intensity, f0 were made in Praatand analyzed in SPSS. The Mixed Models analysis of normalized intensity and duration revealed that the acoustic cue of stress is the duration of the rhyme. A similar finding for Hindi, a closely related language, is reported in Nair et al. (2001). As for tone, the default tone has the smallest f0 range and the falling tone has the largest f0 range. Falling tone is realized entirely on the stressed syllable whereas for the rising tone, the phenomenon of peak delay is observed unless tone occurs on a word-final syllable. Peak delay is also observed in Mandarin (Xu, 2001). This work offers an in-depth understanding of the phonological aspects of the stress and tone systems of Punjabi.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→