English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Our previous studies demonstrated that it is possible to perform the classification of both simulated pressed and actual vocally fatigued voice productions versus vocally healthy productions through the pattern recognition of sEMG signals obtained from subjects’ anterior neck. In these studies, the commonly accepted Vocal Fatigue Index factor 1 (VFI-1) was used for the ground-truth labeling of normal versus vocally fatigued voice productions. Through recent experiments, other factors with potential effects on classification were also studied, such as sEMG signal normalization, and data imbalance—i.e., the large difference between the number of vocally healthy subjects and of those with vocal fatigue. Therefore, in this paper, we present a much improved classification method derived from an extensive study of the effects of such extrinsic factors on the classification of vocal fatigue. The study was performed on a large number of sEMG signals from 88 vocally healthy and fatigued subjects including student teachers and teachers and it led to important conclusions on how to optimize a machine learning approach for the early detection of vocal fatigue.

Classification of Vocal Fatigue Using sEMG: Data Imbalance, Normalization, and the Role of Vocal Fatigue Index Scores