Objective and Subjective Assessment of Amplified Parkinsonian Speech Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypophonia is a common speech impairment associated with Parkinson's disease (PD). Voice amplifiers are typically used to increase voice loudness, but little is known about their impact on perceived speech quality. In this paper, speech recordings were obtained from 11 PD subjects with and without the use of seven different amplification devices, and in the absence or presence of background noise. The recorded speech samples were rated for their sound quality by 10 naive listeners. The same speech recordings were analyzed objectively, where in linear prediction, mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs), and gammatone cepstral coefficients (GFCCs) were extracted and mapped to predicted quality scores using linear regression and Support Vector Regression (SVR). Results showed that amplification devices differentially affect the perceived quality of PD speech, that objective and subjective quality scores correlated well, and that a reduced set of GFCC features mapped with SVR produced the best correlation with the subjective scores.
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".