王刚,王楠,严嘉健,等.构音评估与训练系统的声学分析研究[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志,2023,45(6):500-505
扫码阅读全文
|
| 构音评估与训练系统的声学分析研究 |
|
| |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.2023.06.004 |
| 中文关键词: 构音评估与训练系统 Praat 声学分析软件 语音参数 一致性 |
| 英文关键词: Articulation assessment and training system Praat Acoustic analysis software Voice parameters Consistency |
| 基金项目:国家重点研发计划资助（2020YFC2005700）；广东省科技计划项目（2021A1414020006）；广州市重点研发计划资助（202103000027） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1266 |
| 全文下载次数: 1312 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 比较智能提取语音参数的构音评估与训练系统和人工提取语音参数的Praat声学软件在重要参数上的差异。 方法 选取32例正常受试者，分别用构音评估与训练系统和传统Praat语音软件进行语音采集，前者可以即时智能分析出持续元音／a／、／i／、／u／的平均基频（mF0）、第一共振峰（F1）、第二共振峰（F2），传统Praat软件则是通过人工提取采录语音参数并进行数据分析。对上述两种语音分析工具的重要声学参数进行一致性分析。 结果 采用构音评估与训练系统对同一受试者进行第1次评估和第2次评估，除元音／u／的mF0（ICC=0.75）重测信度较好外，元音／a／的mF0（ICC=0.97）、F1(ICC=0.97)和F2(ICC=0.98)，元音／i／的mF0(ICC=0.93)、F1(ICC=1.00)和F2(ICC=0.95)，元音／u／的F1(ICC=0.98)和F2(ICC=0.94)的ICC值均高于0.90，说明构音评估与训练系统的重测信度极好。两种声学分析软件元音／a／的mF0(ICC=0.99)、F1(ICC=0.96)和F2(ICC=0.90)，元音／i／的mF0(ICC=0.98)、F1(ICC=0.94)和F2(ICC=0.94)，元音／u／的mF0(ICC=0.95)和F1(ICC=0.94)的ICC值均高于0.90，说明两种声学分析软件在分析元音／a／、／i／的mF0、F1和F2，元音／u／的F1和F2方面的一致性极好。元音／u／的F2 ICC值介于0.75～0.90，说明两种声学分析软件在分析元音／u／的F2方面的一致性较好。两种声学分析软件的元音／a／、／i／、／u／的mF0、F1、F2、共振峰集中率（FCR）、元音清晰度指数（VAI）、舌距、元音空间面积（VSA）、下颌距在Bland-Altman图中数据点多分布在95%可信区间内，说明两种声学分析软件在语音测量中具有较高的准确性。男性长元音／a／的mF0（151.35±30.94）、／i／的mF0（163.84±27.92）、／u／的mF0（170.96±31.99）均低于女性长元音／a／的mF0（277.93±23.48）、／i／的mF0（280.34±27.23）、／u／的mF0（284.97±37.08），差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。 结论 构音评估与训练系统的重测信度较好，在自然状态下的构音检查结果与Praat检查结果比较的一致性较好，在构音检查上可以相互替代。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To compare the differences in important parameters between the articulation assessment and training system of intelligently extracted speech with those from the Praat acoustic software and those manually extracted. Methods The speech of thirty-two normal subjects was captured using the intelligent articulation assessment and training system and using Praat acoustic software. The former analyzed the mean fundamental frequencies (mF0s), the first formant peaks (F1s) and the second formant peak (F2s) of the sustained vowels /a/, /i/ and /u/. The speech parameters collected by the traditional Praat software were extracted and analyzed by professionals. The two tools′ consistency in terms of these important acoustic parameters was analyzed. Results The results with all 32 subjects when retested returned ICC values above 0.9 with all three vowels with the exception of mF0 for /u/ (ICC=0.75), indicating excellent retest reliability for the articulation assessment and training system. The ICC values also indicated excellent consistency between the two kinds of software in analyzing mF0, F1 and F2 of the three vowels. The mF0, F1, F2, FCR, VAI, tongue spacing, VSA, and mandibular spacing of all three vowels were mostly distributed within the 95% confidence interval of the data points in Bland-Altman plots, indicating the high accuracy of both acoustic analysis systems in speech measurement. The mean fundamental frequency values of the male long vowels /a/, /i/ and /u/ were all significantly lower than for the female long versions. Conclusions The retest reliability of the articulation assessment and training system was good, and the results of the articulation check in the natural state were in good consistency compared to the Praat check and were interchangeable in the articulation check. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
