MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experience-Dependent Modulation of Feedback Integration during Singing: Role of the Right Anterior Insula

2013· article· en· W2059909508 on OpenAlexafffund
Boris Kleber, Anthony Zeitouni, Anders Friberg, Robert J. Zatorre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreMcGill UniversityInternational Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound ResearchRoyal Victoria HospitalMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSingingPsychologySomatosensory systemInsulaSensory systemNeuroscienceAudiologyMotor controlMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Somatosensation plays an important role in the motor control of vocal functions, yet its neural correlate and relation to vocal learning is not well understood. We used fMRI in 17 trained singers and 12 nonsingers to study the effects of vocal-fold anesthesia on the vocal-motor singing network as a function of singing expertise. Tasks required participants to sing musical target intervals under normal conditions and after anesthesia. At the behavioral level, anesthesia altered pitch accuracy in both groups, but singers were less affected than nonsingers, indicating an experience-dependent effect of the intervention. At the neural level, this difference was accompanied by distinct patterns of decreased activation in singers (cortical and subcortical sensory and motor areas) and nonsingers (subcortical motor areas only) respectively, suggesting that anesthesia affected the higher-level voluntary (explicit) motor and sensorimotor integration network more in experienced singers, and the lower-level (implicit) subcortical motor loops in nonsingers. The right anterior insular cortex (AIC) was identified as the principal area dissociating the effect of expertise as a function of anesthesia by three separate sources of evidence. First, it responded differently to anesthesia in singers (decreased activation) and nonsingers (increased activation). Second, functional connectivity between AIC and bilateral A1, M1, and S1 was reduced in singers but augmented in nonsingers. Third, increased BOLD activity in right AIC in singers was correlated with larger pitch deviation under anesthesia. We conclude that the right AIC and sensory-motor areas play a role in experience-dependent modulation of feedback integration for vocal motor control during singing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations116
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207