Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nature of the precedence effect was investigated by introducing a gap into (1) both the leading and lagging sounds, (2) the lagging but not the leading sound, and (3) the leading but not the lagging sound. When a 50-ms gap was introduced into both sounds with an onset asynchrony equal to the delay between the leading and lagging sounds, the gap was perceived to occur only on the leading side as long as the delay between leading and lagging sounds did not exceed approximately 15 ms, even though the precedence effect itself broke down when the delay between the leading and lagging sounds exceeded approximately 9 ms. Gaps presented only in lagging sounds were always heard as occurring in the source position of the leading sound, but no gaps were perceived when the gap occurred only in the leading sound, rather, the listener heard a noise burst from the position of the lagging (suppressed) sound. The present results indicate that gaps in the lagging sound are perceived as belonging to the leading sound, whereas gaps in the leading sound release the lagging sound from ‘‘echo suppression,’’ indicating that higher-order (top–down) processes are involved in the precedence effect.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".