MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252246659 · doi:10.1121/1.4800950

Phonetic properties of [v] in Russian, Serbian and Greek

2013· article· en· W4252246659 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christina Bjorndahl

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of meetings on acoustics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsObstruentSerbianLinguisticsRealization (probability)Stress (linguistics)SyllableWord (group theory)PhoneticsMathematicsPsychologyVowelPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the phonetic properties of the segment [v] in Greek, Serbian and Russian. [v] patterns phonologically like an obstruent in Greek but like a sonorant in Serbian; in Russian it patterns with both obstruents and sonorants. We test the hypothesis that cross-linguistic differences in the phonological status of [v] correlate with phonetic differences. We report on spectral and durational measures of [v] in four environments: word-initial stressed, word-initial unstressed, word-medial stressed and word-medial unstressed. Our results show an association between phonological patterning and phonetic realization. Greek tokens of [v] are produced with significantly more high-frequency spectral energy than those in Serbian, suggesting a relation between phonological status and phonetic realization in these two languages. Tokens of Russian [v] exhibit the same relationship to tokens of Greek [v] in word-initial stressed position; elsewhere, they are produced with relatively little high-frequency spectral energy. Furthermore, the effects of word position and syllable stress are found to be additive in Russian. These results are important because they support the notion that there exist interactions between the phonological status of a segment and its phonetic realization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of meetings on acousticsSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207