Back

Training-Free Cross-Lingual Dysarthria Severity Assessment via Phonological Subspace Analysis in Self-Supervised Speech Representations

Muller, B.; Ortiz Barranon, A. A.; Roberts, L.

2026-04-17 neurology
10.64898/2026.04.12.26350731 medRxiv
Show abstract

Dysarthric speech severity assessment typically requires either trained clinicians or supervised machine learning models built from labelled pathological speech data, limiting scalability across languages and clinical settings. We present a training-free method (no supervised severity model is trained; feature directions are estimated from healthy control speech using a pretrained forced aligner) that quantifies dysarthria severity by measuring the degradation of phonological feature subspaces within frozen HuBERT representations. For each speaker, we extract phone-level embeddings via Montreal Forced Aligner, compute d scores along phonological contrast directions (nasality, voicing, stridency, sonorance, manner, and four vowel features) derived exclusively from healthy control speech, and construct a 12-dimensional phonological profile. Evaluating 890 speakers across10corpora, 5 languages for the full MFA pipeline (English, Spanish, Dutch, Mandarin, French) and 3 primary aetiologies (Parkinsons disease, cerebral palsy, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), we find that all five consonant d features correlate significantly with clinical severity (random-effects meta-analysis rho = -0.50 to -0.56, p < 2 x 10^-4; pooled Spearman rho = -0.47 to -0.55 with bootstrap 95% CIs not crossing zero), with the effect replicating within individual corpora, surviving FDR correction, and remaining robust to leave-one-corpus-out removal and alignment quality controls. Nasality d decreases monotonically from control to severe in 6 of 7 severity-graded corpora. Mann-Whitney U tests confirm that all 12 features distinguish controls from severely dysarthric speakers (p < 0.001).The method requires no dysarthric training data and applies to any language with an existing MFA acoustic model (currently 29 languages) or a model trained from healthy speech alone. It produces clinically interpretable per-feature profiles. We release the full pipeline and phone feature configurations for six languages to support replication and clinical adoption. Author SummaryOne of the authors has lived with ALS for sixteen years. Bernard Muller, who built this entire analytical pipeline using only eye-tracking technology, has experienced the progression of the disease firsthand, including the dysarthric speech that comes with advancing ALS and the tracheostomy that followed. The problem this paper addresses is not abstract to him, and that shapes how the method was designed. We developed a method to measure how well a person with dysarthria can produce distinct speech sounds, without needing any recordings of disordered speech for training. Our approach works by analysing how a widely available AI speech model organises different sound categories -- such as nasal versus oral consonants, or voiced versus voiceless sounds -- and measuring whether those categories become harder to tell apart. We tested this on 890 speakers across 10 datasets in five languages, covering Parkinsons disease, cerebral palsy, and ALS. Because the method only needs healthy speech recordings to set up, it applies to any language with an existing acoustic model, currently covering 29 languages. The resulting profiles show clinicians which specific aspects of speech production are degrading, rather than providing a single opaque severity score. This could support remote monitoring of speech decline in neurodegenerative disease and enable screening in languages and settings where specialist assessment is unavailable.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 3%
14.4%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 5%
10.5%
3
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.9%
5
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.3%
6
Nature Computational Science
50 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
7
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.9%
50% of probability mass above
9
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
10
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
11
Journal of Neurophysiology
263 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
12
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
14
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.7%
15
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
16
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.5%
17
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
18
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.3%
19
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 47%
1.3%
20
Nature Neuroscience
216 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
21
Bioinformatics Advances
184 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
22
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
23
Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
24
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
25
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.7%
26
Muscle & Nerve
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
27
Annals of Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.6%
29
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
30
npj Parkinson's Disease
89 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%