MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965579526 · doi:10.1152/jn.00940.2010

Neuronal activation times to simple, complex, and natural sounds in cat primary and nonprimary auditory cortex

2011· article· en· W1965579526 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrés E. Carrasco, Stephen G. Lomber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAuditory cortexNeuroscienceStimulus (psychology)Sensory systemNatural soundsPsychologySpeech recognitionComputer scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between living organisms and the environment are commonly regulated by accurate and timely processing of sensory signals. Hence, behavioral response engagement by an organism is typically constrained by the arrival time of sensory information to the brain. While psychophysical response latencies to acoustic information have been investigated, little is known about how variations in neuronal response time relate to sensory signal characteristics. Consequently, the primary objective of the present investigation was to determine the pattern of neuronal activation induced by simple (pure tones), complex (noise bursts and frequency modulated sweeps), and natural (conspecific vocalizations) acoustic signals of different durations in cat auditory cortex. Our analysis revealed three major cortical response characteristics. First, latency measures systematically increase in an antero-dorsal to postero-ventral direction among regions of auditory cortex. Second, complex acoustic stimuli reliably provoke faster neuronal response engagement than simple stimuli. Third, variations in neuronal response time induced by changes in stimulus duration are dependent on acoustic spectral features. Collectively, these results demonstrate that acoustic signals, regardless of complexity, induce a directional pattern of activation in auditory cortex.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207