MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W396308363 · doi:10.7282/t3ww7gb2

The acoustics of uvulars in Tlingit

2013· article· en· W396308363 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper looks at the acoustics of uvulars in Tlingit, an Athabaskan language spoken in Alaska and Canada. Data from five native speakers was used for acoustic analysis for tokens from five phoneme groups (alveolars, plain velars, labialized velars, plain uvulars, and labialized uvulars). The tokens were analyzed by computing spectral moments of plosive bursts and fricatives, and F2 and F3 values for post-consonantal vowels, which were used to calculate locus equations, a descriptive measure of the relationship between F2 at vowel onset and midpoint. Several trends were observed, including a greater difference between F2 and F3 after uvulars than after velars, as well as a higher center of gravity (COG) and lower skew and kurtosis for uvulars than for velars. The comparison of plain versus labialized consonants supports the finding of Suh (2008) that labialization lowers mean burst energy, or COG, and additionally found labialization to raise skew and kurtosis.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.155 · 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