Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
One of the basic parameters characterising voiced phonation is the fundamental frequency, named pitch, which is the rate of vibration of the folds. In pathological voices. pitch variations within an utterance are indicative of the patient status. As such voices are corrupted by 'noise', robust pitch estimation methods are required in order to track its variations. This paper aims to compare some pitch estimation methods, pointing out their main advantages and drawbacks for present application. For each method, modifications are proposed in order to enhance performance. The methods are tested on simulated signals and then applied to real signals, coming both from healthy and pathological voices. The latter we obtained from patients who have undergone surgery for vocal folds via laser or traditional lancet techniques.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1350-4533(00)00018-7 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!