An extended Kalman filter approach to non-stationary Bayesian estimation of reduced-order vocal fold model parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Bayesian framework for parameter inference provides a basis from which subject-specific reduced-order vocal fold models can be generated. Previously, it has been shown that a particle filter technique is capable of producing estimates and associated credibility intervals of time-varying reduced-order vocal fold model parameters. However, the particle filter approach is difficult to implement and has a high computational cost, which can be barriers to clinical adoption. This work presents an alternative estimation strategy based upon Kalman filtering aimed at reducing the computational cost of subject-specific model development. The robustness of this approach to Gaussian and non-Gaussian noise is discussed. The extended Kalman filter (EKF) approach is found to perform very well in comparison with the particle filter technique at dramatically lower computational cost. Based upon the test cases explored, the EKF is comparable in terms of accuracy to the particle filter technique when greater than 6000 particles are employed; if less particles are employed, the EKF actually performs better. For comparable levels of accuracy, the solution time is reduced by 2 orders of magnitude when employing the EKF. By virtue of the approximations used in the EKF, however, the credibility intervals tend to be slightly underpredicted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".