Other work has also examined CPP in languages other than English, including Spanish ( Delgado-Hernández et al., 2019 Núñez-Batalla et al., 2019), Korean ( Lee et al., 2019 Yu et al., 2018), and Turkish ( Aydinli et al., 2019). Many of these findings in English speakers are reviewed by Fraile and Godino-Llorente (2014), which also provides an overview of the algorithms underlying CPP computation. In contrast, CPP can be extracted from connected speech and sustained vowels and does not require direct computation of the fundamental frequency.Ī growing body of work has demonstrated CPP's ability to differentiate perceptually dysphonic and nondysphonic voices across languages, disorder types, and speaking tasks. Those traditional measures can only be extracted from sustained vowels and rely on fundamental frequency computation, which may not be reliable for voices with more than moderate dysphonia. In this recommendation, CPP replaces previous measures of acoustic perturbation, including jitter, shimmer, and harmonics-to-noise ratio. In 2018, guidance from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) recommended CPP as a tool for “measuring the overall level of noise in the vocal signal” and as “a general measure of dysphonia” ( Patel et al., 2018). Recent work in acoustic voice analysis has increasingly supported the cepstral peak prominence (CPP) as an objective measure of breathiness and overall dysphonia.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |