Representation of concurrent acoustic objects in primary auditory cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditory scene analysis involves the simultaneous grouping and parsing of acoustic data into separate mental representations (i.e., objects). Over two experiments, we examined the sequence of neural processes underlying concurrent sound segregation by means of recording of human middle latency auditory evoked responses. Participants were presented with complex sounds comprising several harmonics, one of which could be mistuned such that it was not an integer multiple of the fundamental frequency. In both experiments, Na (approximately 22 ms) and Pa (approximately 32 ms) waves were reliably generated for all classes of stimuli. For stimuli with a fundamental frequency of 200 Hz, the mean Pa amplitude was significantly larger when the third harmonic was mistuned by 16% of its original value, relative to when it was tuned. The enhanced Pa amplitude was related to an increased likelihood in reporting the presence of concurrent auditory objects. Our results are consistent with a low-level stage of auditory scene analysis in which acoustic properties such as mistuning act as preattentive segregation cues that can subsequently lead to the perception of multiple auditory objects.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".