Auditory object feature maps with a hierarchical network of independent components?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditory Object representation in the brain is still a controversial question [1,2]. Kumar et al. [3] discuss the hierarchical organization for auditory object perception and observe that the Planum Temporale (PT) area of the cortex encodes invariant representations of the spectral envelops of sounds. Many other studies find maps of representations elsewhere in the brain (Cochlear Nucleus, Inferior Nucleus, etc.). Sparse representations with minimum overlap could be considered, according to Barlow [4]. Griffiths and Warren [5] propose that auditory object representations might be segmented or segregated in the Planum Temporal (PT) by increasing the independence between the neural activities. We therefore explore the potential of a hierarchical neural assembly - with the use of a computer simulation - whose layers increase the feature independence during training, to represent auditory object parts. It is observed that learned features are organized into non-overlapping maps (Figure (Figure1)1) and that redundancy of the representation is in fact reduced. Learning was done on three categories of sounds having distinct acoustical statistics: speech, music and natural sounds. We observed that the learned feature maps are very different from one sound category to another and might be, to some extend, comparable to receptive fields measured in the brain. We discuss of their potential similarity with receptive fields measured in the Inferior Colliculus of the Guinea Pig and how they might be part of a representation of auditory objects in the brain. Figure 1 Learned representations illustrated for speech and natural sounds. FastICA training is first done on patches of 80ms x 32 cochlear channels of the envelopes coming from a 128 channels cochleagram (Level L0). Then, patches of 160ms x 64 cochlear 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".