Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report describes three experiments on auditory saltation, studied with click stimuli presented at interclick intervals (ICIs) from 30 to 240 ms. In experiment 1, subjects rated the strength of the saltation illusion evoked by trains of six monaural clicks (i.e., three presented to one ear followed by three to the other ear), and six dichotic clicks on which were imposed either a 500-micros interaural time difference or a 9-dB interaural level difference (ILD). The interaural disparity of theclicks was reversed at the midpoint of the train. Subjects reported equivalent strengths of saltation for the dichotic clicks, but weaker saltation for the monaural ones. These data indicated that saltation is supported by dichotic clicks, regardless of the stimulus manipulation used to generate the lateralized images. In experiment 2, subjects rated the strength of the saltation evoked by six click trains lateralized, in separate trials, by ILDs ranging from 9 to 30 dB, and by a train of monaural clicks. In all ILD conditions, the level of the clicks at the "quiet" ear was above click-detection threshold when presented monaurally. Saltation weakened with increasing ILD, and approximated that seen with monaural clicks when the ILD was 30 dB. These data indicated that for the range of ICIs used here, saltation weakened as the stimuli became more strongly lateralized. In experiment 3, the number of dichotic clicks preceding the disparity reversal was, in separate trials, varied from 3 to 10, and subjects were asked to detect the presence of spatial stationarity in the click train. By plotting the subjective ratings as a function of the length of the leading click train, it was shown that the temporal window within which the saltation effect operates varies between listeners, but is usually less than about 350-400 ms.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".