MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110475528 · doi:10.1121/1.5147175

Acoustic correlates of laryngeal control: Parkinson's and healthy older adults

2020· article· en· W3110475528 on OpenAlexaff
Marcelo S. Vieira, Noémie Auclair‐Ouellet, Meghan Clayards

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonationCorrelationIntensity (physics)Negative correlationAudiologySyllableArticulatory phoneticsPositive correlationMedicineMathematicsPhysicsSpeech recognitionInternal medicineComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vocal fold tension is commonly used to control pulmonary airflow and subglottal pressure, resulting in a positive f0-intensity correlation. Since Parkinson's disease (PD) constrains fine movements, this mechanism may be impaired in PD. We analyzed the f0-intensity correlation in PD and a healthy age- and gender-matched control group. For that, we extracted gender-normalized f0, intensity, and spectral emphasis (SE) from each syllable in three sentences of a read text. Additionally, from a sustained [a] task, we measured maximum phonation time ([a] duration; MPT) as well as jitter and shimmer (combined using PCA; JS). Using Linear Mixed Models, we confirmed the f0-intensity correlation in each group. Furthermore, JS interacted with intensity, indicating that voice instability weakens the correlation. No MPT effect was found. Importantly, even controlling for JS and MPT, the f0-intensity correlation was significantly weaker in PD. Lastly, we build a model using SE instead of intensity and only a negative correlation was found. Overall, this study suggests that voice instability negatively affects airflow control, but is not sufficient to explain its reduction in PD. Moreover, it indicates that the SE-f0 relationship is preserved in PD and it is not affected by the voice parameters analyzed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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