MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7001964814

Location and Size of Constriction in Velar Sounds in Parisian French

2024· other· en· W7001964814 on OpenAlexafffundvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConstrictionPlace of articulationArticulation (sociology)Point (geometry)Euclidean distance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the constriction location (CL) of the velar stop [k] in French. While previous studies have investigated how vocalic contexts influence the CL of velar stops [Liker & Gibbon (2008) Clin. Ling. & Phon. 22(2); Tabain (2000) JPhon 28(2)], few investigated high-level changes in CL. Building on our prior work [Islam & Gick (2023) JASA 154], which showed an unexpected palato-velar articulation of [k] followed by [a] compared with [w] followed by [a], we tested whether this [k]-palatalizing is universal or specific to [a]. Using a French MRI speech corpus [Isaieva et al., Scientific Data 8], we measured constriction in [k] before [i], [ɛ], [o], [u], and [a]. MRI video frames were manually traced to mark the upper surface of the tongue and the lower surface of the hard palate, resulting in two contours. Using Euclidean distance, the location of the constriction was identified as the narrowest point and distance, respectively, between the two contours. A Python script that measured Euclidean distance from traced MRI frames calculated these distances from the MRI frames. Results indicate a frontal shift in [k] across all contexts, indicating a general fronting articulation of [k] in French speech.

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)0.002
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207