Cross-modal perception of rhythm in music and dance by cochlear implant users
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies examined adult cochlear implant (CI) users' ability to match auditory rhythms occurring in music to visual rhythms occurring in dance (Cha Cha, Slow Swing, Tango and Jive). In Experiment 1, adults CI users (n = 10) and hearing controls matched a music excerpt to choreographed dance sequences presented as silent videos. In Experiment 2, participants matched a silent video of a dance sequence to music excerpts. CI users were successful in detecting timing congruencies across music and dance at well above-chance levels suggesting that they were able to process distinctive auditory and visual rhythm patterns that characterized each style. However, they were better able to detect cross-modal timing congruencies when the reference was an auditory rhythm than when the reference was a visual rhythm. Learning strategies that encourage cross-modal learning of musical rhythms may have applications in developing novel rehabilitative strategies to enhance music perception and appreciation outcomes of child implant users.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it