Literature DB >> 26936555

Comparing measurement errors for formants in synthetic and natural vowels.

Christine H Shadle1, Hosung Nam1, D H Whalen1.   

Abstract

The measurement of formant frequencies of vowels is among the most common measurements in speech studies, but measurements are known to be biased by the particular fundamental frequency (F0) exciting the formants. Approaches to reducing the errors were assessed in two experiments. In the first, synthetic vowels were constructed with five different first formant (F1) values and nine different F0 values; formant bandwidths, and higher formant frequencies, were constant. Input formant values were compared to manual measurements and automatic measures using the linear prediction coding-Burg algorithm, linear prediction closed-phase covariance, the weighted linear prediction-attenuated main excitation (WLP-AME) algorithm [Alku, Pohjalainen, Vainio, Laukkanen, and Story (2013). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134(2), 1295-1313], spectra smoothed cepstrally and by averaging repeated discrete Fourier transforms. Formants were also measured manually from pruned reassigned spectrograms (RSs) [Fulop (2011). Speech Spectrum Analysis (Springer, Berlin)]. All but WLP-AME and RS had large errors in the direction of the strongest harmonic; the smallest errors occur with WLP-AME and RS. In the second experiment, these methods were used on vowels in isolated words spoken by four speakers. Results for the natural speech show that F0 bias affects all automatic methods, including WLP-AME; only the formants measured manually from RS appeared to be accurate. In addition, RS coped better with weaker formants and glottal fry.

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26936555      PMCID: PMC4752539          DOI: 10.1121/1.4940665

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  21 in total

1.  Time-varying spectral change in the vowels of children and adults.

Authors:  P F Assmann; W F Katz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Analysis of vocal tract shape and dimensions using magnetic resonance imaging: vowels.

Authors:  T Baer; J C Gore; L C Gracco; P W Nye
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Formant frequency estimation of high-pitched vowels using weighted linear prediction.

Authors:  Paavo Alku; Jouni Pohjalainen; Martti Vainio; Anne-Maria Laukkanen; Brad H Story
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Phonetic applications of the time-corrected instantaneous frequency spectrogram.

Authors:  Sean A Fulop
Journal:  Phonetica       Date:  2008-04-17       Impact factor: 1.759

5.  Toward a consensus on symbolic notation of harmonics, resonances, and formants in vocalization.

Authors:  Ingo R Titze; Ronald J Baken; Kenneth W Bozeman; Svante Granqvist; Nathalie Henrich; Christian T Herbst; David M Howard; Eric J Hunter; Dean Kaelin; Raymond D Kent; Jody Kreiman; Malte Kob; Anders Löfqvist; Scott McCoy; Donald G Miller; Hubert Noé; Ronald C Scherer; John R Smith; Brad H Story; Jan G Švec; Sten Ternström; Joe Wolfe
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Kalman-based autoregressive moving average modeling and inference for formant and antiformant tracking.

Authors:  Daryush D Mehta; Daniel Rudoy; Patrick J Wolfe
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Reliability of human-supervised formant-trajectory measurement for forensic voice comparison.

Authors:  Cuiling Zhang; Geoffrey Stewart Morrison; Felipe Ochoa; Ewald Enzinger
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Sweep-tone measurements of vocal-tract characteristics.

Authors:  O Fujimura; J Lindqvist
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  The accuracy of formant frequency measurements: a comparison of spectrographic analysis and linear prediction.

Authors:  R B Monsen; A M Engebretson
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1983-03

10.  Linear prediction analysis of speech based on a pole-zero representation.

Authors:  B S Atal; M R Schroeder
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  8 in total

1.  F0-induced formant measurement errors result in biased variabilities.

Authors:  Wei-Rong Chen; D H Whalen; Christine H Shadle
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Formants are easy to measure; resonances, not so much: Lessons from Klatt (1986).

Authors:  D H Whalen; Wei-Rong Chen; Christine H Shadle; Sean A Fulop
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 2.482

3.  Assessing speech correction abilities with acoustic analyses: Evidence of preserved online correction in persons with aphasia.

Authors:  Caroline A Niziolek; Swathi Kiran
Journal:  Int J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 2.484

Review 4.  Static measurements of vowel formant frequencies and bandwidths: A review.

Authors:  Raymond D Kent; Houri K Vorperian
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 2.288

5.  Effects of sampling rate and type of anti-aliasing filter on linear-predictive estimates of formant frequencies in men, women, and children.

Authors:  Paul H Milenkovic; Madison Wagner; Raymond D Kent; Brad H Story; Houri K Vorperian
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Detrending the Waveforms of Steady-State Vowels.

Authors:  Marnix Van Soom; Bart de Boer
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 2.524

7.  Perturbing the consistency of auditory feedback in speech.

Authors:  Daniel R Nault; Takashi Mitsuya; David W Purcell; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 3.473

8.  Auditory-perceptual acuity in rhotic misarticulation: baseline characteristics and treatment response.

Authors:  Laine Cialdella; Heather Kabakoff; Jonathan Preston; Sarah Dugan; Caroline Spencer; Suzanne Boyce; Mark Tiede; D Whalen; Tara McAllister
Journal:  Clin Linguist Phon       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 1.346

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.