## 2 Methodology
### Graphical Description of the System Overview  
Elicited speech samples were directly recorded on the laptop using a microphone mounted to a headphone. Each response from confrontation naming and single word repetition tasks were recorded separately. Pre-recorded words were presented to the subject in the word repetition task. The auditory models were presented via external speakers connected to a laptop. Initially, a trial test for confrontation naming and single word repetition tasks was conducted, in order to introduce the instructions. The pictures and words included in the trial test were not included in the actual assessment. For a better diagnosis, all attempts of a participant were recorded to determine the nature of word elicitation. The assessment was conducted twice using manual assessment and software. However, speech samples of both instances were recorded and analyzed. Data obtained from all participants were evaluated using the algorithm. According to scores obtained in each task, the proposed hybridized aphasia diagnosis process objectively derives the potential diagnosis. Figure 2 depicts the overview of the software architecture. The system consists of confrontation naming, repetition, and comprehension components. The confrontational naming task consists of 30 pictures. In confrontation naming, a single picture stimulus is presented to the participant at a time. The participants were asked to identify the picture and elicit the corresponding word. The repetition task consists of 15 single words. The participants were instructed to repeat the presented word. Elicited speech signals for confrontation naming and repetition tasks were recorded and stored in.wav format. The comprehension task consists of two subcomponents, i.e., single word comprehension and simple command comprehension. The single word comprehension task contains 10 frequent words. The participants should identify the target object  
Figure 1: Workflow of the proposed quantitative aphasia assessment tool.  
among pictures presented on the laptop screen. The simple command comprehension task evaluates the ability to follow simple instructions. Each instruction consists of one or more objects, sequences, and actions to be performed. In order to avoid the subjective perception of SLPs, the objects, actions, and sequences are included in the assessment. The implemented software autonomously process input speech signals to evaluate acoustic frequencies in confrontation naming and repetition tasks. Initially, the analog speech signal was digitized by sampling repeatedly and encoding the results into a set of bits. Sequentially, the acoustic parameters of the speech signals were determined by applying mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs). The similarity level with the template was calculated using dynamic time warping (DTW). Although the comprehension task was not automated at this release and uses inputs from a SLP, all the parameters and desired responses are readily available in the assessment manual to avoid subjectivity and ambiguity. Upon completion, respective scores, i.e., naming score, repetition score, and comprehension score, were calculated using acoustic frequencies and SLP input.