MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modulation of P2 auditory-evoked responses by the spectral complexity of musical sounds

2005· article· en· W2108433765 on OpenAlexaff
Antoine J. Shahin, Larry E. Roberts, Christo Pantev, Laurel J. Trainor, Bernhard Roß

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusical tonePitch (Music)Stimulus (psychology)PsychologyAudiologySpectral envelopeTone (literature)PianoCommunicationMagnetoencephalographyAuditory perceptionTimbreFundamental frequencyElectroencephalographyAcousticsSpeech recognitionPerceptionNeuroscienceMusicalCognitive psychologyPhysicsComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated whether N1 and P2 auditory-evoked responses are modulated by the spectral complexity of musical sounds in pianists and non-musicians. Study participants were presented with three variants of a C4 piano tone equated for temporal envelope but differing in the number of harmonics contained in the stimulus. A fourth tone was a pure tone matched to the fundamental frequency of the piano tones. A simultaneous electroencephalographic/magnetoencephalographic recording was made. P2 amplitude was larger in musicians and increased with spectral complexity preferentially in this group, but N1 did not. The results suggest that P2 reflects the specific features of acoustic stimuli experienced during musical practice and point to functional differences in P2 and N1 that relate to their underlying mechanisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations196
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207