Cross-modal signatures in maternal speech and singing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explored the possibility of a unique cross-modal signature in maternal speech and singing that enables adults and infants to link unfamiliar speaking or singing voices with subsequently viewed silent videos of the talkers or singers. In Experiment 1, adults listened to 30-s excerpts of speech followed by successively presented 7-s silent video clips, one from the previously heard speaker (different speech content) and the other from a different speaker. They successfully identified the previously heard speaker. In Experiment 2, adults heard comparable excerpts of singing followed by silent video clips from the previously heard singer (different song) and another singer. They failed to identify the previously heard singer. In Experiment 3, the videos of talkers and singers were blurred to obscure mouth movements. Adults successfully identified the talkers and they also identified the singers from videos of different portions of the song previously heard. In Experiment 4, 6- to 8-month-old infants listened to 30-s excerpts of the same maternal speech or singing followed by exposure to the silent videos on alternating trials. They looked longer at the silent videos of previously heard talkers and singers. The findings confirm the individuality of maternal speech and singing performance as well as adults' and infants' ability to discern the unique cross-modal signatures. The cues that enable cross-modal matching of talker and singer identity remain to be determined.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".