Human Auditory Cortex Activity Shows Additive Effects of Spectral and Spatial Cues during Speech Segregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In noisy social gatherings, listeners perceptually integrate sounds originating from one person's voice (e.g., fundamental frequency (f(0)) and harmonics) at a particular location and segregate these from concurrent sounds of other talkers. Though increasing the spectral or the spatial distance between talkers promotes speech segregation, synergetic effects of spatial and spectral distances are less well understood. We studied how spectral and/or spatial distances between 2 simultaneously presented steady-state vowels contribute to perception and activation in auditory cortex using magnetoencephalography. Participants were more accurate in identifying both vowels when they differed in f(0) and location than when they differed in a single cue only or when they shared the same f(0) and location. The combined effect of f(0) and location differences closely matched the sum of single effects. The improvement in concurrent vowel identification coincided with an object-related negativity that peaked at about 140 ms after vowel onset. The combined effect of f(0) and location closely matched the sum of the single effects even though vowels with different f(0), location, or both generated different time courses of neuromagnetic activity. We propose that during auditory scene analysis, acoustic differences among the various sources are combined linearly to increase the perceptual distance between the co-occurring sound 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".