Triangular body-cover model of the vocal folds with coordinated activation of the five intrinsic laryngeal muscles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poor laryngeal muscle coordination that results in abnormal glottal posturing is believed to be a primary etiologic factor in common voice disorders such as non-phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction. Abnormal activity of antagonistic laryngeal muscles is hypothesized to play a key role in the alteration of normal vocal fold biomechanics that results in the dysphonia associated with such disorders. Current low-order models of the vocal folds are unsatisfactory to test this hypothesis since they do not capture the co-contraction of antagonist laryngeal muscle pairs. To address this limitation, a self-sustained triangular body-cover model with full intrinsic muscle control is introduced. The proposed scheme shows good agreement with prior studies using finite element models, excised larynges, and clinical studies in sustained and time-varying vocal gestures. Simulations of vocal fold posturing obtained with distinct antagonistic muscle activation yield clear differences in kinematic, aerodynamic, and acoustic measures. The proposed tool is deemed sufficiently accurate and flexible for future comprehensive investigations of non-phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction and other laryngeal motor control disorders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".