Development of auditory‐specific brain rhythm in infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human infants rapidly develop their auditory perceptual abilities and acquire culture-specific knowledge in speech and music in the second 6 months of life. In the adult brain, neural rhythm around 10 Hz in the temporal lobes is thought to reflect sound analysis and subsequent cognitive processes such as memory and attention. To study when and how such rhythm emerges in infancy, we examined electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings in infants 4 and 12 months of age during sound stimulation and silence. In the 4-month-olds, the amplitudes of narrowly tuned 4-Hz brain rhythm, recorded from bilateral temporal electrodes, were modulated by sound stimuli. In the 12-month-olds, the sound-induced modulation occurred at faster 6-Hz rhythm at temporofrontal locations. The brain rhythms in the older infants consisted of more complex components, as even evident in individual data. These findings suggest that auditory-specific rhythmic neural activity, which is already established before 6 months of age, involves more speed-efficient long-range neural networks by the age of 12 months when long-term memory for native phoneme representation and for musical rhythmic features is formed. We suggest that maturation of distinct rhythmic components occurs in parallel, and that sensory-specific functions bound to particular thalamo-cortical networks are transferred to newly developed higher-order networks step by step until adult hierarchical neural oscillatory mechanisms are achieved across the whole brain.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".