Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a previously developed 208-variable smoking-status voice model could be compressed into interpretable acoustic domains without materially reducing speaker-independent discrimination, and to assess which domains remained stable across model, perturbation, and counterfactual analyses. METHODS: A secondary analysis was performed on the previously reported cohort of 64 speakers (30 smokers and 34 nonsmokers), using one primary smartphone-recorded sustained /a/ phonation per speaker. The exact 208-variable prosody-spectral feature cache was grouped into 16 prespecified acoustic domains. Domain scores were constructed independently within each leave-one-speaker-out fold using training-only imputation, robust scaling, direction alignment, and median aggregation. A balanced logistic model was evaluated from raw out-of-fold scores. Full-pipeline permutation tests, demographic residualization, domain-only models, demographic-conditional domain replacement, one-speaker jackknife analysis, a secondary Explainable Boosting Machine, and empirical counterfactual searches were performed. RESULTS: The 16-domain model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.753 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.624-0.864), compared with 0.769 (95% CI, 0.645-0.878) for the recovered 208-variable model; the paired difference was -0.016 (95% CI, -0.129 to 0.095). Full-pipeline permutation tests were significant under both unrestricted permutation (P = 0.00599) and permutation restricted within age-by-gender strata (P = 0.00500). Spectral centroid, formant structure, and harmonicity/noise were significant as standalone domains after Holm correction. No single conditional-replacement test remained significant after correction. Spectral centroid ranked first in 49 of 64 jackknife analyses and appeared in 57.1% of minimal plausible counterfactuals. A plausible counterfactual was found for 98.4% of speakers, with one domain sufficient for 84.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking-associated voice discrimination could be represented compactly through interpretable acoustic domains. The evidence favored a distributed, partially redundant spectral and resonance pattern rather than a single indispensable biomarker. The results describe model behavior in this cohort and require external validation before clinical interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aydoğan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: