The effect of amplitude envelope on spatial ventriloquism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial ventriloquism occurs when a visual event and an auditory event happen simultaneously; location judgments for the sound source become biased toward the location of the visual event. Evidence suggests the brain attributes greater weight to spatial information provided by the visual stimulus because the visual system offers better spatial acuity; when the visual stimulus is deteriorated, the visual bias is reduced. Thus, the brain performs optimal bimodal integration: greater weight is given to the modality which provides more information. The present study aims to determine whether the amplitude envelope of sounds provides spatial localization information to the perceptual system. We used a psychophysical staircase procedure to measure spatial ventriloquism experienced by participants for sounds with percussive, flat, and time-reversed percussive envelopes. We hypothesize that percussive and reverse-percussive sounds provide more information and thus better sound localization acuity than flat sounds, which would result in smaller degrees of spatial ventriloquism for the former than the latter. The results yield insight into the brain’s use of auditory cues in audio-visual integration.
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 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".