MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038579805 · doi:10.1121/1.1320473

Independence of frequency channels in auditory temporal gap detection

2000· article· en· W2038579805 on OpenAlexafffund
Dennis P. Phillips, Susan E. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcousticsPerceptionChannel (broadcasting)Range (aeronautics)Radio spectrumComputer scienceAudiologyPhysicsPsychologyNeuroscienceMaterials scienceTelecommunicationsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of listeners to detect a temporal gap in a 1600-Hz-wide noiseband (target) was studied as a function of the absence and presence of concurrent stimulation by a second 1600-Hz-wide noiseband (distractor) with a nonoverlapping spectrum. Gap detection thresholds for single noisebands centered on 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, and 5.0 kHz were in the range from 4 to 6 ms, and were comparable to those described in previous studies. Gap thresholds for the same target noisebands were only modestly improved by the presence of a synchronously gated gap in a second frequency band. Gap thresholds were unaffected by the presence of a continuous distractor that was either proximate or remote from the target frequency band. Gap thresholds for the target noiseband were elevated if the distractor noiseband also contained a gap which "roved" in time in temporal proximity to the target gap. This effect was most marked in inexperienced listeners. Between-channel gap thresholds, obtained using leading and trailing markers that differed in frequency, were high in all listeners, again consistent with previous findings. The data are discussed in terms of the levels of the auditory perceptual processing stream at which the listener can voluntarily access auditory events in distinct frequency channels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207