Song Recognition by Children and Adolescents With Cochlear Implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess song recognition and pitch perception in prelingually deaf individuals with cochlear implants (CIs). METHOD: Fifteen hearing children (5-8 years) and 15 adults heard different versions of familiar popular songs-original (vocal + instrumental), original instrumental, and synthesized melody versions-and identified the song in a closed-set task (Experiment 1). Ten CI users (8-18 years) and age-matched hearing listeners performed the same task (Experiment 2). Ten CI users (8-19 years) and 10 hearing 8-years-olds were required to detect pitch changes in repeating-tone contexts (Experiment 3). Finally, 8 CI users (6-19 years) and 13 hearing 5-year-olds were required to detect subtle pitch changes in a more challenging melodic context (Experiment 4). RESULTS: CI users performed more poorly than hearing listeners in all conditions. They succeeded in identifying the original and instrumental versions of familiar recorded songs, and they evaluated them favorably, but they could not identify the melody versions. Although CI users could detect a 0.5-semitone change in the simple context, they failed to detect a 1-semitone change in the more difficult melodic context. CONCLUSION: Current implant processors provide insufficient spectral detail for some aspects of music perception, but they do not preclude young implant users' enjoyment of music.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".