MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389102425 · doi:10.1121/10.0023295

Location and size of constriction in labiovelar, velar, and uvular sounds in French

2023· article· en· W4389102425 on OpenAlexaff
Jahurul Islam, Bryan Gick

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchwaVowelConstrictionMathematicsAcousticsPhysicsComputer scienceSpeech recognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the location and size of constriction in the labio-velar sound [w]. While there have been studies exploring constrictions in different sounds including schwa [Gick, 2002, Phonetica 59], /r/ [Epsy-Wilsonet al., 2000, JASA 108], and clicks [Miller et al., 2009, JIPA 39], the understanding of the constriction in labio-velar sound [w] in relation to neighboring sounds is limited. We utilized an MRI corpus of French speech [Isaieva et al., Scientific Data 8] to measure the location and size of the constrictions in [w], [k], [u], and [ʁ]. The MRI video frames were manually traced to mark the upper surface of the tongue and the lower surface of the hard-palate, velum, and uvula, resulting in two contours. Using Euclidean distance, the location and size of the constriction were identified as the narrowest point and distance, respectively, between the two contours. Results confirmed that [w,u] had constrictions against the velum; [k]’s, however, had constrictions fronter than [w,u] (centroids were 0.88au apart on normalized X-Y space), making them more palatal. [ʁ]’s had uvular constrictions, as expected. Regarding constriction size, [w], despite being an approximant consonant, had a more open constriction than the vowel [u].

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→