MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897768920 · doi:10.1121/1.5059493

Voice Onset Time in English voiceless stops is affected by following postvocalic liquids and voiceless onsets

2018· article· en· W2897768920 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Jeff Mielke, Kuniko Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCollege of Humanities and Social Sciences, United Arab Emirates UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDirectorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic SciencesNorth Carolina State University
KeywordsObstruentVoice-onset timeSyllableAudiologyVoiceVariation (astronomy)PsychologyWord (group theory)PerceptionLinguisticsAmerican EnglishSpeech recognitionComputer scienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voice Onset Time is an important characteristic of stop consonants that plays a large role in perceptual discrimination in many languages, and is widely used in phonetic research. The current paper aims to account for Voice Onset Time variation in English that has defied previously understood phonetic and lexical factors, particularly involving stops that are followed in the word by liquids and voiceless obstruents. 122 Canadian English speakers produced 120 /p/- and /k/-initial words (n = 17 533), and word-initial Voice Onset Time was analyzed. It was found that Voice Onset Time is shorter when the following syllable starts with a voiceless obstruent, and that this effect is mediated by speech rate. Voice Onset Time is also longer before postvocalic liquids, even when they are intervocalic. Voice Onset Time generally decreases through the course of the task, and speakers tend to drift during the course of a word reading task, and this is best accounted for by the residual Voice Onset Time of recently spoken words.

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)0.002
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207