MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027919181 · doi:10.1121/10.0001276

Bayesian estimation of vocal function measures using laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy and glottal airflow estimates: An <i>in vivo</i> case study

2020· article· en· W3027919181 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel A. Alzamendi, Rodrigo Manríquez, Paul J. Hadwin, Jonathan J. Deng, Sean D. Peterson, Byron D. Erath, Daryush D. Mehta, Robert E. Hillman, Matías Zañartu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFondo de Fomento al Desarrollo Científico y TecnológicoNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica
KeywordsArticulatory phoneticsAirflowPhonationComputer scienceLarynxElectroglottographVocal foldsSpeech recognitionAcousticsMedicineAudiologyAnatomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces the in vivo application of a Bayesian framework to estimate subglottal pressure, laryngeal muscle activation, and vocal fold contact pressure from calibrated transnasal high-speed videoendoscopy and oral airflow data. A subject-specific, lumped-element vocal fold model is estimated using an extended Kalman filter and two observation models involving glottal area and glottal airflow. Model-based inferences using data from a vocally healthy male individual are compared with empirical estimates of subglottal pressure and reference values for muscle activation and contact pressure in the literature, thus providing baseline error metrics for future clinical investigations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207