MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597472060 · doi:10.5772/14296

The Impact of Stochastic and Deterministic Sounds on Visual, Tactile and Proprioceptive Modalities

2011· book-chapter· en· W1597472060 on OpenAlexaff
J. E. Lugo, R. Doti, Jocelyn Faubert

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProprioceptionModalitiesComputer sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stimulus localization and particularly directional hearing can be considered as methods for investigating neural activity and they have proven to be useful tools for research in physiology and psychology.Human directional hearing techniques have been reflected upon way back by Von Békésy in Austrian forests [1].For example, he observed that some of the roads took a perfectly straight course through deep, dark woods.He could not imagine how such straight roads had been cut through the forest when the usual optical methods used by road surveyors would seem to be useless in this case.Further some of these roads were very old and probably built before the introduction of the theodolite.Many of these roads were laid out by an acoustic method.How did they do it?A man stationed at the starting point noted the direction of the sound produced by someone at the other end blowing a horn.The first man then walked toward the sound source, marking the threes on the way.It turned out that this method produced a straight line from start to finish [1].From this observation Békésy was motivated to perform a series of studies on stimuli localization not limited to hearing but also to vibration sensations on the skin, electrical pulses on the tongue and odors through the nose as well.Strikingly, his results showed an underlying ubiquitous mechanism present in the different stimuli localization modalities.For instance, the effect on localization of the time delay between two stimuli on the skin, the tongue, the two nostrils in the nose and the two ears, presented the same dynamics [2-4].These results were quite exciting because it showed that, in humans, the senses work similarly for stimuli localization although the basic underlying neural pathways are not the same.It was this kind of general principle on stimuli localization that motivated us in the search for more general principles related to how senses interact to generate multisensory perceptions but with a special emphasis on auditory stimulation.This is known as multisensory integration and its study is very important because it is the foundation of how humans bind all the information coming from the senses to generate a coherent percept.We began by studying something that we called cross-modal stochastic resonance.This consists www.intechopen.com

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInTech eBooksSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207