## 3 Results
### Speakers Variability Results
Furthermore, most of the utterances judged as wrong by the expert were rated as right by the therapist (100% in cell W-Cont.R for S3). Concerning the therapist's judgments, the \(Cont.R\) decision could be identified as a _Right_ assignment in a high percentage of cases for S01, S02 and S03 speakers (69%, 85.2% and 94.9% respectively). These are the speakers with a higher developmental level, according to Table 2. Of these three participants, the first, with more disagreement between the therapist and the prosody expert, showed the lowest prosodic level from the outset. In general, the correspondence between real time decisions and expert judgment is not straightforward, with a high variety in the contingency table. Concerning the therapist's _Rep._ decision, the highest percentages of agreement are obtained for S04 and S05 speakers (62.5% and 73.0%, respectively), who are the speakers with the lowest developmental level in all the variables measured, as seen in Table 2.  
To deepen our analysis of how the inter-individual heterogeneity can affect the assessment results, Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between the profile of the speakers of the C1 subcorpus and the assessment values. To ensure the appropriateness of the use of this correlation coefficient, the normality assumption was first checked for all the variables under analysis [43]. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test showed that the assumption was fulfilled for all cases (\(p\)-value \(>\) 0.05). Table 6 shows the Pearson correlation results. Short-term verbal memory (STVM) is not included in this analysis because the values of the STVM of S04 and S05 were not high enough to be taken into account. Verbal mental age (VA) is highly and significantly correlated with Non-verbal cognitive level (NVCL), Prosodic perception (MPerCT), percentage of Right expert evaluations (RRate) and all therapist evaluations. The correlation is positive for the NVCL, MPerCT, RRate and ConRRate features, while the correlation is negative for the ContRate and RepRate features. NVCL is significantly correlated with RRate and ContRRate (positive) and with ContRate and RepRate (negative). In addition, MPerCT is positively and significantly correlated with RRate and ContRRate, and negatively and significantly \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Expert Judgment**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Classified as**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Therapist Decision**} \\ \hline
**Speaker** & **\#Total utt** & **Type** & **\#utt** & **R** & **W** & **Cont.R** & **Cont.** & **Rep.** \\ \hline S01 & 120 & R & 87 & 83.9\% & 16.1\% & 69\% & 24.1\% & 6.9\% \\  & & W & 33 & 57.6\% & 42.4\% & 30.3\% & 36.7\% & 33.3\% \\ \hline S02 & 106 & R & 81 & 87.7\% & 12.4\% & 85.2\% & 14.8\% & 0.0\% \\  & & W & 25 & 28.0\% & 72.0\% & 84.0\% & 16.0\% & 0.0\% \\ \hline S03 & 97 & R & 78 & 97.4\% & 2.6\% & 94.9\% & 3.9\% & 1.3\% \\  & & W & 19 & 73.7\% & 26.3\% & 100.0\% & 0.0\% & 0.0\% \\ \hline S04 & 131 & R & 75 & 94.6\% & 5.3\% & 21.3\% & 44.0\% & 34.7\% \\  & & W & 56 & 41.1\% & 58.9\% & 5.4\% & 32.1\% & 62.5\% \\ \hline S05 & 151 & R & 77 & 87\% & 13\% & 20.8\% & 50.7\% & 28.6\% \\  & & W & 74 & 29.7\% & 70.3\% & 6.8\% & 20.3\% & 73\% \\ \hline Total & 605 & R & 398 & 89.9\% & 10.1\% & 80.2\% & 68.8\% & 35.5\% \\  & & W & 207 & 41.1\% & 58.9\% & 19.8\% & 31.2\% & 64.5\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Percentage of coincidence between therapist decision, classifier (SVM in case D) and prosody expert per speaker. Concerning the classifier, R represents the utterances classified as Right by the classifier and W represents the utterances classified as Wrong by the classifier. Each row percentage is relative to the number of each type of utterances of prosody expert evaluation. correlated with RepRate. Prosodic production (MProdT) is significantly correlated with ContRRate in a positive way and is significantly correlated with ContRate in a negative way.