Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Refining algorithmic estimation of relative fundamental frequency: Accounting for sample characteristics and fundamental frequency estimation method.
Vojtech, Jennifer M; Segina, Roxanne K; Buckley, Daniel P; Kolin, Katharine R; Tardif, Monique C; Noordzij, J Pieter; Stepp, Cara E.
Afiliación
  • Vojtech JM; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 44 Cummington Mall, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
  • Segina RK; Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
  • Buckley DP; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, 72 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA.
  • Kolin KR; Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
  • Tardif MC; Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
  • Noordzij JP; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, 72 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA.
  • Stepp CE; Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
J Acoust Soc Am ; 146(5): 3184, 2019 11.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31795681
ABSTRACT
Relative fundamental frequency (RFF) is a promising acoustic measure for evaluating voice disorders. Yet, the accuracy of the current RFF algorithm varies across a broad range of vocal signals. The authors investigated how fundamental frequency (fo) estimation and sample characteristics impact the relationship between manual and semi-automated RFF estimates. Acoustic recordings were collected from 227 individuals with and 256 individuals without voice disorders. Common fo estimation techniques were compared to the autocorrelation method currently implemented in the RFF algorithm. Pitch strength-based categories were constructed using a training set (1158 samples), and algorithm thresholds were tuned to each category. RFF was then computed on an independent test set (291 samples) using category-specific thresholds and compared against manual RFF via mean bias error (MBE) and root-mean-square error (RMSE). Auditory-SWIPE' for fo estimation led to the greatest correspondence with manual RFF and was implemented in concert with category-specific thresholds. Refining fo estimation and accounting for sample characteristics led to increased correspondence with manual RFF [MBE = 0.01 semitones (ST), RMSE = 0.28 ST] compared to the unmodified algorithm (MBE = 0.90 ST, RMSE = 0.34 ST), reducing the MBE and RMSE of semi-automated RFF estimates by 88.4% and 17.3%, respectively.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Acústica / Algoritmos / Trastornos de la Voz Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Acoust Soc Am Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Acústica / Algoritmos / Trastornos de la Voz Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Acoust Soc Am Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos