Quantifying errors due to frequency changes and target location uncertainty for radar refractivity retrievals

Radar refractivity retrievals can capture near-surface humidity changes, but noisy phase changes of the ground clutter returns limit the accuracy for both klystron- and magnetron-based systems. Observations with a C-band (5.6 cm) magnetron weather radar indicate that the correction for phase changes introduced by local oscillator frequency changes leads to refractivity errors no larger than 0.25 N units: equivalent to a relative humidity change of only 0.25% at 20°C. Requested stable local oscillator (STALO) frequency changes were accurate to 0.002 ppm based on laboratory measurements. More serious are the random phase change errors introduced when targets are not at the range-gate center and there are changes in the transmitter frequency (ΔfTx) or the refractivity (ΔN). Observations at C band with a 2-μs pulse show an additional 66° of phase change noise for a ΔfTx of 190 kHz (34 ppm); this allows the effect due to ΔN to be predicted. Even at S band with klystron transmitters, significant phase change noise should occur when a large ΔN develops relative to the reference period [e.g., ~55° when ΔN = 60 for the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) radars]. At shorter wavelengths (e.g., C and X band) and with magnetron transmitters in particular, refractivity retrievals relative to an earlier reference period are even more difficult, and operational retrievals may be restricted to changes over shorter (e.g., hourly) periods of time. Target location errors can be reduced by using a shorter pulse or identified by a new technique making alternate measurements at two closely spaced frequencies, which could even be achieved with a dual–pulse repetition frequency (PRF) operation of a magnetron transmitter.

Word frequency and bigram frequency effects on linguistic processing and speech motor performance in individuals with aphasia and normal speakers

Models of normal word production are well specified about the effects of frequency of linguistic stimuli on lexical access, but are less clear regarding the same effects on later stages of word production, particularly word articulation. In aphasia, this lack of specificity of down-stream frequency effects is even more noticeable because there is relatively limited amount of data on the time course of frequency effects for this population. This study begins to fill this gap by comparing the effects of variation of word frequency (lexical, whole word) and bigram frequency (sub-lexical, within word) on word production abilities in ten normal speakers and eight mild–moderate individuals with aphasia. In an immediate repetition paradigm, participants repeated single monosyllabic words in which word frequency (high or low) was crossed with bigram frequency (high or low). Indices for mapping the time course for these effects included reaction time (RT) for linguistic processing and motor preparation, and word duration (WD) for speech motor performance (word articulation time). The results indicated that individuals with aphasia had significantly longer RT and WD compared to normal speakers. RT showed a significant main effect only for word frequency (i.e., high-frequency words had shorter RT). WD showed significant main effects of word and bigram frequency; however, contrary to our expectations, high-frequency items had longer WD. Further investigation of WD revealed that independent of the influence of word and bigram frequency, vowel type (tense or lax) had the expected effect on WD. Moreover, individuals with aphasia differed from control speakers in their ability to implement tense vowel duration, even though they could produce an appropriate distinction between tense and lax vowels. The results highlight the importance of using temporal measures to identify subtle deficits in linguistic and speech motor processing in aphasia, the crucial role of phonetic characteristics of stimuli set in studying speech production and the need for the language production models to account more explicitly for word articulation.