Lateral inhibition and habituation of the human auditory cortex
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to compare the lateral inhibition and the habituation in the human auditory cortex, two important physiological effects during auditory processing that can be reliably measured by means of magnetoencephalography when recording auditory evoked fields. Applying 40-Hz amplitude-modulated stimuli allowed us to record simultaneously the slow transient evoked and the steady-state fields and thus to characterize the lateral inhibition and the habituation effect in primary and non-primary auditory cortical structures. The main finding of the study is that the lateral inhibition effect of non-primary auditory areas as measured on the major component of the slow transient auditory evoked field (N1) is significantly stronger than the corresponding habituation effect. By contrast, this effect was not observed for the 40-Hz steady-state fields, characterizing the activation of the primary auditory cortex in humans. The results might be interpreted as (i) evidence that the inhibition mediated by lateral connections is stronger than the habituation of excitatory neurons in the non-primary auditory cortex and (ii) the processing hierarchy in the human auditory cortex is demonstrated by the different behaviour of lateral inhibition and habituation in primary and non-primary auditory cortical structures.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it