Validation of a Speech Database for Assessing College Students’ Physical Competence under the Concept of Physical Literacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study developed a speech database for assessing one of the elements of physical literacy-physical competence. Thirty-one healthy and native Cantonese speakers were instructed to read a material aloud after various exercises. The speech database contained four types of speech, which were collected at rest and after three exercises of the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy 2nd Edition. To show the possibility of detecting each exercise state, a support vector machine (SVM) was trained on the acoustic features. Two speech feature sets, the extended Geneva Minimalistic Acoustic Parameter Set (eGeMAPS) and Computational Paralinguistics Challenge (ComParE), were utilized to perform speech signal processing. The results showed that the two stage four-class SVM were better than the stage one. The performances of both feature sets could achieve 70% accuracy (unweighted average recall (UAR)) in the three-class model after five-fold cross-validation. The UAR result of the resting and vigorous state on the two-class model running with the ComParE feature set was 97%, and the UAR of the resting and moderate state was 74%. This study introduced the process of constructing a speech database and a method that can achieve the short-time automatic classification of physical states. Future work on this corpus, including the prediction of the physical competence of young people, comparison of speech features with other age groups and further spectral analysis, are suggested.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".