Sound localization in callosal agenesis and early callosotomy subjects: brain reorganization and/or compensatory strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to evaluate the callosal involvement in sound localization, the present study examined the response accuracy of acallosal and early callosotomized subjects to monaural and binaural auditory targets presented in three-dimensional space. In these subjects, bilateral localization cues, such as interaural time and level differences, are integrated at the cortical and subcortical levels without the additional support of the callosal commissure. Because acallosal and early-callosotomized subjects have developed with this reduced source of binaural activation of cortical cells, they might have perfected their ability to use monaural sound localization cues. This hypothesis was tested by assessing localization performance under both binaural and monaural listening conditions. Five subjects with callosal agenesis, one callosotomized subject operated early in life and 19 control subjects were asked to localize broad-band noise bursts (BBNBs) of fixed intensity in the horizontal plane in an anechoic chamber. BBNBs were delivered through randomly selected loudspeakers. Two conditions were tested: (i) localization of a stationary sound source; and (ii) localization of a moving sound source. Listeners had to report the apparent stimulus location by pointing to its perceived position on a graduated perimeter. The results indicated that the acallosal subjects were less accurate than controls, but only in the binaural moving sound condition. More interestingly, in the monaural testing conditions, some of the acallosal subjects and the early-callosotomized subject performed significantly better than control subjects. This suggests that, because of the absence of the corpus callosum, these subjects compensate for their reduced access to cortically determined binaural cues by making more efficient use of monaural cues.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".