Cited by 46Voice and Speech DisordersPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesEmotion and Mood Recognition

Towards interpretable speech biomarkers: exploring MFCCs

Open access
Tracey, Brian, Volfson, Dmitri, Glass, James, Haulcy, R’mani, Kostrzebski, Melissa, Adams, Jamie, Kangarloo, Tairmae, Brodtmann, Amy +2 more·2023·Scientific Reports

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

While speech biomarkers of disease have attracted increased interest in recent years, a challenge is that features derived from signal processing or machine learning approaches may lack clinical interpretability. As an example, Mel frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs) have been identified in several studies as a useful marker of disease, but are regarded as uninterpretable. Here we explore correlations between MFCC coefficients and more interpretable speech biomarkers. In particular we quantify the MFCC2 endpoint, which can be interpreted as a weighted ratio of low- to high-frequency energy, a concept which has been previously linked to disease-induced voice changes. By exploring MFCC2 in several datasets, we show how its sensitivity to disease can be increased by adjusting computation parameters.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-023-49352-2

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tracey, B., Volfson, D., Glass, J., Haulcy, R., Kostrzebski, M., Adams, J., Kangarloo, T., Brodtmann, A., Dorsey, E. R., & Vogel, A.
Affiliations
  • MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Tracey, Brian
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2023-12-21
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
22787-22787
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390030622
Cited by
46
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1
FWCI
8.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.
  • Biogen
  • members of the Critical Path for Parkinson’s Consortium 3DT Initiative, Stage 2
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Phonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
speech biomarkers, Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients, interpretable features, voice change, disease detection, speech processing, parameter sensitivity
MeSH terms
Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Speech, Speech Acoustics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review