Comparison of nonlinear dynamic methods and perturbation methods for voice analysis

Nonlinear dynamic methods and perturbation methods are compared in terms of the effects of signal length, sampling rate, and noise. Results of theoretical and experimental studies quantitatively show that measurements representing frequency and amplitude perturbations are not applicable to chaotic signals because of difficulties in pitch tracking and sensitivity to initial state differences. Perturbation analyses are only reliable when applied to nearly periodic voice samples of sufficiently long signal lengths that were obtained at high sampling rates and low noise levels. In contrast, nonlinear dynamic methods, such as correlation dimension, allow the quantification of chaotic time series. Additionally, the correlation dimension method presents a more stable analysis of nearly periodic voice samples for shorter signal lengths, lower sampling rates, and higher noise levels. The correlation dimension method avoids some of the methodological issues associated with perturbation methods, and may potentially improve the ability for real time analysis as well as reduce costs in experimental designs for objectively assessing voice disorders.