Somatic memory and gain increase as preconditions for tinnitus: Insights from congenital deafness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tinnitus is the conscious perception of sound heard in the absence of physical sound sources internal or external to the body. The characterization of tinnitus by its spectrum reflects the missing frequencies originally represented in the hearing loss, i.e., partially or completely deafferented, region. The tinnitus percept, despite a total hearing loss, may thus be dependent on the persisting existence of a somatic memory for the "lost" frequencies. Somatic memory in this context is the reference for phantom sensations attributed to missing sensory surfaces or parts thereof. This raises the question whether tinnitus can exist in congenital deafness, were somatic representations have not been formed. We review the development of tonotopic maps in altricial and precocial animals evidence for a lack of tinnitus in congenital deafness and the effects of cochlear implants on the formation of tonotopic maps in the congenitally deaf. The latter relates to the emergence of tinnitus in these subjects. The reviewed material is consistent with the hypothesis that tinnitus requires an established and actively used somatotopic map that leads to a corresponding somatic memory. The absence of such experience explains the absence of tinnitus in congenital bilateral and unilateral deafness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".