Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes recent advances in functional magnetic resonance imaging that reveal similarities in the organization of human auditory cortex (HAC) and auditory cortex of nonhuman primates. RECENT FINDINGS: Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have shown that HAC is a compact region that covers less than 8% of the total cortical surface. HAC is subdivided into more than a dozen distinct auditory cortical fields (ACFs) that surround Heschl's gyri on the superior temporal plane. Recent advances that permit the visualization of the results of functional magnetic imaging experiments directly on the cortical surface have provided new insights into the organization of human ACFs. Evidence suggests that medial regions of HAC are organized in a manner similar to the auditory cortex of other primate species with a set of tonotopically organized core ACFs surrounded by belt ACFs that often share tonotopic organization with the core. Although influenced by attention, responses in HAC core and belt fields are largely determined by the acoustic properties of stimuli, including their frequency, intensity, and location. In contrast, lateral regions of HAC contain parabelt fields that are little influenced by simple acoustic features but rather respond to behaviorally relevant complex sounds such as speech and are strongly modulated by attention. SUMMARY: HAC conserves the basic structural and functional organization of auditory cortex as seen in old world primate species. A central challenge to future research is to understand how this basic primate plan has evolved to support uniquely human abilities such as music and language.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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".