Modeling the judgment of vowel quality differences.
Modeling the judgment of vowel quality differences.
复制标题
元音质量差异判断建模。
DOI：
10.1121/1.385824
复制
发表时间：
1981
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Lindblom
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Bladon;B. Lindblom
本研究的假设是，与听者对元音质量判断相关的听觉线索是响度密度与音高的谱表示。一个模型，产生这样的模式，稳态元音。除了响度密度和音高尺度下的非线性变换，它结合了实验建立的特性与频率分辨率和掩蔽，如临界带的概念。该模型与听觉感知距离的测量相结合，该测量对元音进行操作，将每个刺激表示视为单个频谱形状。为了测试的距离度量和模型，实验数据收集从听众的数字估计的刺激对之间的质量差异比较四共振峰和两共振峰元音。实验结果与理论值的相关系数为0.89。我们解释这个值表明，目前的听觉线索和听觉距离的定义可以说是占我们的听众的实验行为，只有在一个相当粗糙的方式。另一方面，该理论是基于对听觉线索性质的相当保守的假设而发展起来的。例如，该模型忽略了时间编码和某些非线性效应的可能性，并且它不特别关注频谱峰值。从这个角度来看，观察到的听觉距离和预测的听觉距离之间的一致性非常好。
The hypothesis of this study is that the auditory cues relevant to listeners' judgment of vowel quality are a spectral representation of loudness density versus pitch. A model is described that generates such patterns for steady-state vowels. In addition to the nonlinear transformations underlying the loudness density and pitch scales, it incorporates experimentally established characteristics associated with frequency resolution and masking, such as the critical band concept. This model is combined with a measure of auditory perceptual distance which, operating on pairs of vowels, treats each stimulus representation as a single spectral shape. In order to test the distance metric and the model, experimental data were gathered from listeners' numerical estimates of quality differences between stimulus pairs which compared four-formant and two-formant vowels. The correlation between experimental and theoretical results was 0.89. We interpret this value to indicate that the present definition of auditory cue and auditory distance can be said to account for the experimental behavior of our listeners only in a rather gross fashion. On the other hand, the theory was developed on the basis of rather conservative assumptions about the nature of auditory cues. For instance, the model ignores the possibility of temporal coding and certain nonlinear effects, and it does not pay special attention to spectral peaks. Seen in that light, the agreement between observed and predicted auditory distance is remarkably good.