MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010931765 · doi:10.7554/elife.50476.sa2

Author response: Overtone focusing in biphonic tuvan throat singing

2019· peer-review· en· W3010931765 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Bergevin, Chandan Narayan, Joy Williams, Natasha Mhatre, Jennifer K. E. Steeves, Joshua G. W. Bernstein, Brad H. Story

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocal tractSingingFormantTone (literature)AcousticsFundamental frequencyHistorySpeech recognitionCommunicationGeographyComputer sciencePsychologyArtVowelPhysicsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The republic of Tuva, a remote territory in southern Russia located on the border with Mongolia, is perhaps best known for its vast mountainous geography and the unique cultural practice of “throat singing”. These singers simultaneously create two different pitches: a low-pitched drone, along with a hovering whistle above it. This practice has deep cultural roots and has now been shared more broadly via world music performances and the 1999 documentary Genghis Blues. Despite many scientists being fascinated by throat singing, it was unclear precisely how throat singers could create two unique pitches. Singing and speaking in general involves making sounds by vibrating the vocal cords found deep in the throat, and then shaping those sounds with the tongue, teeth and lips as they move up the vocal tract and out of the body. Previous studies using static images taken with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) suggested how Tuvan singers might produce the two pitches, but a mechanistic understanding of throat singing was far from complete. Now, Bergevin et al. have better pinpointed how throat singers can produce their unique sound. The analysis involved high quality audio recordings of three Tuvan singers and dynamic MRI recordings of the movements of one of those singers. The images showed changes in the singer’s vocal tract as they sang inside an MRI scanner, providing key information needed to create a computer model of the process. This approach revealed that Tuvan singers can create two pitches simultaneously by forming precise constrictions in their vocal tract. One key constriction occurs when tip of the tongue nearly touches a ridge on the roof of the mouth, and a second constriction is formed by the base of the tongue. The computer model helped explain that these two constrictions produce the distinctive sounds of throat singing by selectively amplifying a narrow set of high frequency notes that are made by the vocal cords. Together these discoveries show how very small, targeted movements of the tongue can produce distinctive sounds.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0160.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.026

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.115 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207