Exploring how musical rhythm entrains brain activity with electroencephalogram frequency-tagging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to perceive a regular beat in music and synchronize to this beat is a widespread human skill. Fundamental to musical behaviour, beat and meter refer to the perception of periodicities while listening to musical rhythms and often involve spontaneous entrainment to move on these periodicities. Here, we present a novel experimental approach inspired by the frequency-tagging approach to understand the perception and production of rhythmic inputs. This approach is illustrated here by recording the human electroencephalogram responses at beat and meter frequencies elicited in various contexts: mental imagery of meter, spontaneous induction of a beat from rhythmic patterns, multisensory integration and sensorimotor synchronization. Collectively, our observations support the view that entrainment and resonance phenomena subtend the processing of musical rhythms in the human brain. More generally, they highlight the potential of this approach to help us understand the link between the phenomenology of musical beat and meter and the bias towards periodicities arising under certain circumstances in the nervous system. Entrainment to music provides a highly valuable framework to explore general entrainment mechanisms as embodied in the human brain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".