MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205558880 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/t8eyh

Talker variability facilitates the statistical learning of speech sounds

2021· preprint· en· W4205558880 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen C. Van Hedger, Mykayla Winspear, Laura Batterink

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Active listeningStatistical learningSpeech recognitionSyllableNatural (archaeology)PsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural speech contains many sources of acoustic variability both within and between talkers, which challenges speech recognition in some contexts but may facilitate language understanding in novel listening situations. Despite this ubiquitous variability, most previous studies that have examined the ability to extract sound patterns in speech—known as statistical learning—have used highly controlled, artificial, monotonic streams of syllables. Thus, it is unknown whether variability in speech may help or hinder statistical learning – an important question to resolve if statistical learning does indeed play a role in the segmentation of naturally spoken language, as widely theorized. Here, we assessed whether the use of naturally produced, variable speech sounds produced by multiple talkers benefits or impairs statistical learning, including the ability to generalize patterns to a novel talker. During training, participants listened to approximately 12 minutes of continuous speech made up of repeating trisyllabic words, spoken either by a single talker (single-talker condition) or four talkers speaking for three minutes each (multiple-talker condition). Post-training, all participants completed three assessments of learning: (1) an explicit familiarity rating task, (2) an explicit forced-choice recognition task, and (3) an implicit syllable target detection task. Results indicated that participants in both training conditions showed evidence of statistical learning across all assessments, providing an important demonstration that statistical learning is robust to additional variability in the speech signal. Further, in both the forced-choice recognition task and target detection task, participants in the multiple-talker condition showed evidence of facilitated statistical learning, particularly when listening to a novel talker. In the familiarity rating task, performance was comparable between conditions; however, participants trained with multiple talkers were less likely to conflate word familiarity with talker voice familiarity. Overall, these results suggest that training with multiple talkers can improve aspects of statistical learning across multiple measures of learning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207