Perception of vowel sounds within a biologically realistic model of efficient coding

Vowel Inherent Spectral Change

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 117-151

  Kluender, Keith R ^a   Stilp, Christian E ^b   Kiefte, Michael ^c  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

^c DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODES (SYMBOLS); SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

CODING FRAMEWORK; DISCRIMINABILITY; INFORMATION TRANSMISSION; NATURAL SOUNDS; REALISTIC MODEL; SPECTRAL CHANGE; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

LINGUISTICS;

EID: 85027775290     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14209-3_6     Document Type: Chapter

References (125)

1. Aaltonen, O.: The effect of relative amplitude levels of F2 and F3 on the categorization of synthetic vowels. J. Phon. 13, 1-9 (1985)
2. Ainsworth, W.A.: Duration as a cue in the recognition of synthetic vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 51, 648-651 (1972). doi:10.1121/1.1912889
3. Ainsworth, W.A.: The influence of precursive sequences on the perception of synthesized vowels. Lang. Speech 17, 103-109 (1974). doi:10.1177/002383097401700201
4. Ainsworth, W.A.: Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in vowel judgments. In: Fant, G., Tatham, M. (eds.) Auditory Analysis and Perception of Speech, pp. 103-113. Academic, London (1975)
5. Alexander, J.M., Kluender, K.R.: Spectral tilt change in stop consonant perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, 386-396 (2008). doi:10.1121/1.2817617
6. Alexander, J.M., Kluender, K.R.: Temporal properties of perceptual calibration to local and broad spectral characteristics of a listening context. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128(6), 3597-3613 (2010). doi:10.1121/1.3500693
7. Assmann, P.F., Nearey, T.M.: Relationship between fundamental and formant frequencies in voice preference. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 35-43 (2007). doi:10.1121/1.2719045
8. Assmann, P.F., Nearey, T.M.: Identification of frequency-shifted vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 3203-3212 (2008). doi:10.1121/1.2980456
9. Assmann, P.F., Summerfield, Q.: The perception of speech under adverse conditions. In:Greenberg, S., Ainsworth, W.A., Popper, A.N., Fay, R.R. (eds.) Speech Processing in the Auditory System, vol. 14, pp. 231-308. Springer, New York (2004). doi:10.1007/b97399
10. Attneave, F.: Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychol. Rev. 61, 183-193 (1954). doi:10.1037/h0054663
11. Attneave, F.: Applications of Information Theory to Psychology: A summary of Basic Concepts, Methods, and Results. Henry Holt and Company, Inc., New York (1959)
12. Backus, B.T.: Perceptual metamers in stereoscopic vision. In: Dietterich, T.G., Becker, S., Ghahramani, Z. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 14. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)
13. Barlow, H.B.: Sensory mechanisms, the reduction of redundancy, and intelligence. NPL Symp. Mech. Thought Process. 10, 535-539 (1959)
14. Barlow, H.B.: Possible principles underlying the transformations of sensory messages. In:Rosenblith, W.A. (eds) Sensory Communication, pp. 53-85. MIT Press, Wiley, Cambridge, New York (1961)
15. Barlow, H.B.: The knowledge used in vision and where it comes from. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci. 352(1358), 1141-1147 (1997). doi:10.1098/rstb.1997.0097
16. Barlow, H.B.: Redundancy reduction revisited. Netw: Comput. Neural Syst. 12, 241-253 (2001). doi:10.1080/net.12.3.241.253
17. Barlow, H.B., Földiák, P.: Adaptation and decorrelation in the cortex. In: Durbin, R., Miall, C., Mitchison, G. (eds.) The Computing Neuron, pp. 54-72. Addison-Wesley, New York (1989)
18. Bladon, R.A.W., Lindblom, B.: Modeling the judgment of vowel quality differences. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 69, 1414-1422 (1981). doi:10.1121/1.385824
19. Blumstein, S.E.: The mapping from acoustic structure to the phonetic categories of speech: The invariance problem. Behav. Brain Sci. 21, 260 (1998). doi:10.1017/S0140525X98221170
20. Broad, D.J.: Toward defining acoustic phonetic equivalence for vowels. Phonetica 33, 401-424 (1976)
21. Bunton, K., Story, B.H.: Identification of synthetic vowels based on a time-varying model of the vocal tract area function. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 146-152 (2010). doi:10.1121/1.3313921
22. Caclin, A., Brattico, E., Tervaniemi Näätänen, R., Morlet, D., Giard, M.-H., McAdams, S.:Separate neural processing of timbre dimensions in auditory sensory memory. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 18, 1959-1972 (2006). doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.12.1959
23. Chechik, G., Anderson, M.J., Bar-Yosef, O., Young, E.D., Tishby, N., Nelken, I.: Reduction of information redundancy in the ascending auditory pathway. Neuron 51, 359-368 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2006.06.030
24. Chiba, T., Kajiyama, M.: The Vowel: Its Nature and Structure. Tokyo Publishing Co., Tokyo (1941)
25. Clements, G.N.: Does sonority have a phonetic basis? In: Raimy, E., Cairns, C. (eds.) Contemporary Views on Architecture and Representations in Phonological Theory, pp. 165-175. MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)
26. Clifford, C.W.G., et al.: Visual adaptation: neural, psychological and computational aspects. Vision. Res. 47, 3125-3131 (2007). doi:10.1016/j.visres.2007.08.023
27. Cole, R., Yan, Y., Mak, B., Fanty, M., Bailey, T.: The contribution of consonants versus vowels to word recognition in fluent speech. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP’96), pp. 853-856, Atlanta, GA, (1996)
28. Delattre, F.C., Liberman, A.M., Cooper, F.S.: Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 769-773 (1955). doi:10.1121/1.1908024
29. Diehl, R.L., Kluender, K.R.: On the objects of speech perception. Ecol. Psychol. 1, 121-144 (1989). doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0102_2
30. Dresher, B.E., Rice, K.: Complexity in phonological representations. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 12, pp. i-iv (1994)
31. Fairhall, A.L., Lewen, G.D., Bialek, W., de Ruyter van Steveninck, R.R.: Efficiency and ambiguity in an adaptive neural code. Nature 412, 787-792 (2001). doi:10.1038/35090500
32. Fant, C.G.M.: On the predictability of formant levels and spectrum envelopes from formant frequencies. In: Halle, M. (eds) For Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday, pp. 109-120. Mouton, The Hague (1956)
33. Fant, G.: Acoustic Theory of Speech Production with Calculations Based on X-Ray Studies of Russian Articulations. Mouton, The Hague (1970)
34. Fletcher, H.: Speech and Hearing in Communication. Krieger, New York, (1953/1995)
35. Fogerty, D., Kewley-Port, D.: Perceptual contributions of the consonant-vowel boundary to sentence intelligibility. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 847-857 (2009). doi:10.1121/1.3159302
36. Fowler, C.A.: An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct-realist perspective. J. Phon. 14, 3-28 (1986)
37. Garofolo, J., Lamel, L., Fisher, W., Fiscus, J., Pallett, D., Dahlgren, N.: DARPA TIMIT Acoustic-Phonetic Continuous Speech Corpus CDROM. National Institute of Standards and Technology, NTIS Order No. PB91-505065 (1990)
38. Geisler, W.S., Perry, J.S., Super, B.J., Gallogly, D.P.: Edge co-occurrence in natural images predicts contour grouping performance. Vision. Res. 41, 711-724 (2001). doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(00)00277-7
39. Gerstman, L.: Classification of self-normalized vowels. IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. 16, 78-80 (1968). doi:10.1109/TAU.1968.1161953
40. Glasberg, B.R., Moore, B.C.J.: Deviation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hear. Res. 47, 103-138 (1990). doi:10.1016/0378-5955(90)90170-T
41. Gottfried, T.L., Miller, J.L., Payton, P.E.: Effect of speaking rate on the perception of vowels. Phonetica 47, 155-172 (1990). doi:10.1159/000261860
42. Greenwood, D.D.: A cochlear frequency-position function for several species-29 years later. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 2592-2605 (1990). doi:10.1121/1.399052
43. Hebb, D.O.: Organization of Behavior. Wiley, New York (1949)
44. Hedrick, M.S., Nábĕlek, A.K.: Effect of F2 intensity on identification of /u/in degraded listening conditions. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 47, 1012-1021 (2004). doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2004/075
45. Hillenbrand, J.M., Nearey, T.M.: Identification of resynthesized /hVd/utterances: effects of formant contour. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 3509-3523 (1999). doi:10.1121/1.424676
46. Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L.A., Clark, M.J., Wheeler, K.: Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 3099-3111 (1995). doi:10.1121/1.411872
47. Hillis, J.M., Ernst, M.O., Banks, M.S., Landy, M.S.: Combining sensory information: Mandatory fusion within, but not between, senses. Science 298, 1627-1630 (2002). doi:10.1126/science.1075396
48. Houde, J.F., Jordan, M.I.: Sensorimotor adaptation of speech i: compensation and adaptation. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 45, 295-310 (2002). doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2002/023
49. Jakobson, R., Halle, M.: The Fundamentals of Language. Mouton, The Hague (1971)
50. Jenkins, J.J., Strange, W., Edman, T.R.: Identification of vowels in ‘vowelless’ syllables. Percept. Psychophys. 34, 441-450 (1983). doi:10.3758/BF03203059
51. Katseff, S., Johnson, K., House, J.: Auditory feedback shifts in one formant cause multi-formant compensation (A). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 1955 (2010). doi:10.1121/1.3384960
52. Katz, W.F., Assmann, P.F.: Identification of children’s and adults’ vowels: Intrinsic fundamental frequency, fundamental frequency dynamics, and presence of voicing. J. Phon. 29, 23-51 (2001). doi:10.1006/jpho.2000.0135
53. Kent, R.D.: Isovowel lines for the evaluation of vowel formant structure in speech disorders. J. Speech Hear. Disord. 44, 513-521 (1979)
54. Kent, R.D., Miolo, G.: Phonetic abilities in the first year of life. In: Fletcher, P., MacWhinney, B. (eds.) Handbook of Child Language, pp. 303-334. Blackwell, London (1995)
55. Kewley-Port, D., Burkle, T.Z., Lee, J.H.: Contribution of consonant versus vowel information to sentence intelligibility for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 2365-2375 (2007). doi:10.1121/1.2773986
56. Kiefte, M., Kluender, K.R.: The relative importance of spectral tilt in monophthongs and diphthongs. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 1395-1404 (2005). doi:10.1121/1.1861158
57. Kiefte, M., Kluender, K.R.: Absorption of reliable spectral characteristics in auditory perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, 366-376 (2008). doi:10.1121/1.2804951
58. Kiefte, M.: The perception of spectrally and temporally distorted prevocalic stop consonants. unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta (2000)
59. Kiefte, M., Enright, T., Marshall, L.: The role of formant amplitude in the perception of /i/and /u/. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 2611-2621 (2010). doi:10.1121/1.3353124
60. Klatt, D.H.: Prediction of perceived phonetic distance from critical band spectra: a first step. In:Proceedings of ICASSP, pp. 1278-1281 (1982)
61. Kluender, K.R., Alexander, J.M.: Perception of speech sounds. In: Dallos, P., Oertel, D. (eds.) The Senses: A Comprehensive Reference, vol. 3, pp. 829-860. Academic, San Diego (2007)
62. Kluender, K.R., Kiefte, M.: Speech perception within a biologically-realistic informationtheoretic framework. In: Gernsbacher, M.A., Traxler, M. (eds.) Handbook of Psycholinguistics, pp. 153-199. Elsevier, London (2006)
63. Kluender, K.R., Lotto, A.J.: Virtues and perils of empiricist approaches to speech perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 503-511 (1999). doi:10.1121/1.424587
64. Kluender, K.R., Diehl, R.L., Killeen, P.R.: Japanese quail can learn phonetic categories. Science 237, 1195-1197 (1987). doi:10.1126/science.3629235
65. Kluender, K.R., Coady, J.A., Kiefte, M.: Sensitivity to change in perception of speech. Speech Commun. 41(1), 59-69 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00093-6
66. Ladefoged, P.: Three Areas of Experimental Phonetics. Oxford University Press, London (1967)
67. Ladefoged, P., Broadbent, D.: Information conveyed by vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 29, 98-104 (1957). doi:10.1121/1.1908694
68. Lee, J.H., Kewley-Port, D.: Intelligibility of interrupted sentences at subsegmental levels in young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 1153-1163 (2009). doi:10.1121/1.3021304
69. Liberman, A.M., Mattingly, I.G.: The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition 21, 1-36 (1985). doi:10.1016/0010-0277(85)90021-6
70. Liberman, A.M., Harris, K.S., Hoffman, H.S., Griffith, B.C.: The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. J. Exp. Psychol. 54, 358-368 (1957). doi:10.1037/h0044417
71. Liljencrants, J., Lindblom, B.: Numerical simulation of vowel quality systems: the role of perceptual contrast. Language 48(4), 839-862 (1972). doi:10.2307/411991
72. Lindblom, B.: Phonetic universals in vowel systems. In: Ohala, J.J., Jaeger, J.J. (eds.) Experimental Phonology, pp. 13-44. Academic, Orlando (1986)
73. Lindholm, J.M., Dorman, M., Taylor, B.E., Hannley, M.T.: Stimulus factors influencing the identification of voiced stop consonants by normal-hearing and hearing impaired adults. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1608-1614 (1988). doi:10.1121/1.395915
74. Lisker, L.: Rapid versus rabid: a catalogue of acoustical features that may cue the distinction. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, SR-54, pp. 127-132 (1978)
75. Lloyd, R.J.: Some Researches into the Nature of the Vowel-Sound. Turner and Dunnett, Liverpool (1890a)
76. Lloyd, R.J.: Speech sounds: their nature and causation (II-IV). Phonetische Studien 4, 37-67, 183-214, 275-306 (1891)
77. Lloyd, R.J.: Speech sounds: their nature and causation (V-VII). Phonetische Studien 5, 1-32, 129-141, 263-271 (1892b)
78. Lloyd, R.J.: Speech sounds: their nature and causation (I). Phonetische Studien 3, 251-278 (1890b)
79. Lotto, A.J., Kluender, K.R., Holt, L.L.: Depolarizing the perceptual magnet effect. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 3648-3655 (1998). doi:10.1121/1.423087
80. Miller, J.L.: Effects of speaking rate on segmental distinctions. In: Eimas, P.D., Miller, J.L. (eds.) Perspectives on the Study of Speech, pp. 39-74. Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey (1981)
81. Miller, J.D.: Auditory-perceptual interpretation of the vowel. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 2114-2134 (1989). doi:10.1121/1.397862
82. Miller, J.L., Dexter, E.R.: Effects of speaking rate and lexical status on phonetic perception. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 14, 369-378 (1988). doi:10.1037/0096-1523.14.3.369
83. Miller, J.L., Liberman, A.M.: Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop-consonant and semivowel. Percept. Psychophys. 25, 457-465 (1979). doi:10.3758/BF03213823
84. Miller, G.A., Nicely, P.E.: An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 338-352 (1955). doi:10.1121/1.1907526. [Erratum: (1955) 27, 339. doi:10.1121/1.1907983]
85. Minifie, F.D.: Speech acoustics. In: Minifie, F.D., Hixon, T.J., Williams, F. (eds.) Normal Aspects of Speech, Hearing, and Language, pp. 235-284. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1973)
86. Moore, B.C.J., Glasberg, B.R.: Suggested formulas for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74, 750-753 (1983). doi:10.1121/1.389861
87. Nearey, T.M.: Phonetic Feature Systems for Vowels. Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington (1978)
88. Nearey, T.M.: Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 2088-2113 (1989). doi:10.1121/1.397861
89. Nearey, T.M.: Speech perception as pattern recognition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 3241-3254 (1997). doi:10.1121/1.418290
90. Nearey, T.M., Assmann, P.: Modeling the role of inherent spectral change in vowel identification. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80, 1297-1308 (1986). doi:10.1121/1.394433
91. Nearey, T.M.: Vowel inherent spectral change in the vowels of North American English. In:Morrison, G.S., Assmann, P.F. (Eds.) Vowel Inherent Spectral Change (ch. 4). Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
92. Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I: On discriminative vs. generative classifiers: a comparison of logistic regresión and naive Bayes. In: Dietterich, T., Becker, S., Ghahramani, Z. (Eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing (NIPS), vol. 14, MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)
93. Nilsson, M., Soli, S., Sullivan, J.: Development of the Hearing In Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1085-1099 (1994). doi:10.1121/1.408469
94. Nordström, P.-E., Lindblom, B.: A normalization procedure for vowel formant data. In:Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Leeds, England (1975)
95. Nordström, P.-E.: Attempts to simulate female and infant vocal tracts from male area functions. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report (KTH, Stockholm), pp. 2-3, 20-33, (1975)
96. Ohala, J.J.: There is no interface between phonology and phonetics: a personal view. J. Phon. 18, 153-171 (1990)
97. Oja, E.: A simplified neuron model as a principal component analyzer. J. Math. Biol. 15, 267-273 (1982). doi:10.1007/BF00275687
98. Okamura, M.: Shouni boin no nenrei teki henka ni kansuru kenkyuu: Sound Spectrograph niyoru formant kouzou to boin no bunka no kentou [Acoustical studies of Japanese vowels in children: The formant constructions and the developmental process]. Nippon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho [Japan. J. Otolaryngol.] 69, 1198-1214 (1966). doi:10.3950/jibiinkoka.69.6_1198
99. Owren, M.J., Cardillo, G.C.: The relative roles of vowels and consonants in discriminating talker identity versus word meaning. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 1727-1739 (2006). doi:10.1121/1.2161431
100. Patterson, R.D., Nimmo-Smith, I., Weber, D.L., Milroy, R.: The deterioration of hearing with age: Frequency selectivity, the critical ratio, the audiogram, and speech threshold. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 72, 1788-1803 (1982). doi:10.1121/1.388652
101. Purcell, D.W., Munhall, K.G.: Weighting of auditory feedback across the English vowel space. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Seminar on Speech Production (2008)
102. Purcell, D.W., Munhall, K.G.: Adaptive control of vowel formant frequency: evidence from realtime formant manipulation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 966-977 (2006). doi:10.1121/1.2217714
103. Sanger, T.D.: Optimal unsupervised learning in a single-layer linear feedforward neural network. Neural Netw. 2, 459-473 (1989). doi:10.1016/0893-6080(89)90044-0
104. Saberi, K., Perrott, D.R.: Cognitive restoration of reversed speech. Nature 398, 760 (1999). doi:10.1038/19652
105. Schwartz, O., Simoncelli, E.P.: Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 819-825 (2001). doi:10.1038/90526
106. Shannon, C.E.: A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379-423 (1948)
107. Simoncelli, E.P.: Vision and the statistics of the visual environment. Curr. Opinions Neurobiol. 13, 144-149 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00047-3
108. Simoncelli, E.P., Olshausen, B.A.: Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 1193-1215 (2001). doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.1193
109. Stevens, K.N.: Acoustic Phonetics. MIT, Cambridge (1998)
110. Stevens, K.N., Blumstein, S.E.: The search for invariant acoustic correlates of phonetic features. In: Eimas, P.D., Miller, J.L. (eds.) Perspectives in the Study of Speech. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1981)
111. Stilp, C.E., Kluender, K.R.: Cochlea-scaled spectral entropy, not consonants, vowels, or time, best predicts speech intelligibility. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107(27), 12387-12392 (2010). doi:10.1073/pnas.0913625107
112. Stilp, C.E., Kluender, K.R.: Efficient coding and statistically optimal weighting of covariance among acoustic attributes in novel sounds. PLoS ONE 7(1), e30845 (2012). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030845
113. Stilp, C.E., Alexander, J.M., Kiefte, M., Kluender, K.R.: Auditory color constancy: calibration to reliable spectral properties across nonspeech context and targets. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 470-480 (2010a). doi:10.3758/APP.72.2.470
114. Stilp, C.E., Kiefte, M., Alexander, J.M., Kluender, K.R.: Cochlea-scaled spectral entropy predicts rate-invariant intelligibility of temporally distorted sentences. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 2112-2126 (2010b). doi:10.1121/1.3483719
115. Stilp, C.E., Rogers, T.T., Kluender, K.R.: Rapid efficient coding of correlated complex auditory properties. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107(50), 21914-21919 (2010c). doi:10.1073/pnas.1009020107
116. Story, B.H., Bunton, K.: Simulation and identification of vowels based on a time-varying model of the vocal tract area function. In: Morrison G.S., Assmann P.F. (Eds.) Vowel Inherent Spectral Change (ch. 7), Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
117. Sussman, H.M., McCaffrey, H.A., Matthews, S.A.: An investigation of locus equations as a source of relational invariance for stop place categorization. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90, 1309-1325 (1991). doi:10.1121/1.401923
118. Sussman, H.M., Fruchter, D., Hilbert, J., Sirosh, J.: Linear correlates in the speech signal: the orderly output constraint. Behav. Brain Sci. 21(2), 241-259 (1998). doi:10.1017/S0140525X98001174
119. Trubetzkoy, N.S.: Principles of Phonology (C. Baltaxe, Translator) University of California Press, Berkeley. (Original work published in 1939) (1969)
120. Vapnik, V.N.: Statistical Learning Theory. Wiley, New York (1998)
121. Vorperian, H.K., Kent, R.D., Lindstrom, M.J., Kalina, C.M., Gentry, L.R., Yandell, B.S.:Development of vocal tract length during early childhood: a magnetic resonance imaging study. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 338-350 (2005). doi:10.1121/1.1835958
122. Vorperian, H.K., Kent, R.D., Gentry, L.R., Yandell, B.S.: Magnetic resonance imaging procedures to study the concurrent anatomic development of vocal tract structures:preliminary results. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol. 49, 197-206 (1999). doi:10.1016/S0165-5876(99)00208-6
123. Watkins, A.J.: Central, auditory mechanisms of perceptual compensation for spectral-envelope distortion. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90, 2942-2955 (1991). doi:10.1121/1.401769
124. Watkins, A.J., Makin, S.J.: Perceptual compensation for speaker differences and for spectralenvelope distortion. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96, 1263-1282 (1994). doi:10.1121/1.410275
125. Weiner, N.: Cybernetics. Wiley, New York (1948)