2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.03.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Objective measurement of fluency in natural language production: A dynamic systems approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The FPS offers an automated way of reliably summarizing important temporal characteristics of natural speech. While manually analyzed studies have been able to demonstrate differences between groups on variables as diverse as reading speed (Demol et al, 2007), aphasia and neurogenic brain disorders (Hird & Kirsner, 2010;Rosen et al, 2003), and language type (Camione & Véronis, 2002, questions remain over the accuracy and reliability of manual analysis (see, e.g., Oehmen et al, 2010). A reliable and valid automatic method can provide an efficient means of studying differences between populations that vary in fluencies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The FPS offers an automated way of reliably summarizing important temporal characteristics of natural speech. While manually analyzed studies have been able to demonstrate differences between groups on variables as diverse as reading speed (Demol et al, 2007), aphasia and neurogenic brain disorders (Hird & Kirsner, 2010;Rosen et al, 2003), and language type (Camione & Véronis, 2002, questions remain over the accuracy and reliability of manual analysis (see, e.g., Oehmen et al, 2010). A reliable and valid automatic method can provide an efficient means of studying differences between populations that vary in fluencies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The logic behind the classification table is as follows: (1) Only low-energy segments with durations of 20 ms or longer and high-energy segments of 50 ms or longer are considered to be true pause or true speech segments, respectively. These assumptions are based on relevant precedents (e.g., Hird & Kirsner, 2010;Kirsner et al, 2002;Rosen et al, 2003) and on neurophysiological evidence identifying temporal constraints on speech perception and production (Schulze & Langner, 1997;Song et al, 2011). Any segments less than this cutoff length are combined with the adjacent segments.…”
Section: Energy Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The efficient understanding of natural language requires that computer program be able to resolve ambiguities at the syntactic level and recover that part of the meaning of its individual words taken in isolation. [7][8] The satisfaction of this requirement involves complex inference from a large database of worldknowledge, and this makes the designer of computer programs for NLU face the serious difficulty of algorithm processing. [9] The machine comprehension is embedded in the more general frame of interpersonal communication and is applied to the person-machine interaction task.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%