MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234757880 · doi:10.1121/1.4939708

Localization-in-noise and binaural medial olivocochlear functioning in children and young adults

2016· article· en· W2234757880 on OpenAlexafffund
Sriram Boothalingam, Ewan A. Macpherson, Chris Allan, Prudence Allen, David W. Purcell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQUIETMonauralBinaural recordingAudiologyNoise (video)Sound localizationPsychologyAcousticsMedicinePhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children as young as 5 yr old localize sounds as accurately as adults in quiet in the frontal hemifield. However, children's ability to localize in noise and in the front/back (F/B) dimension are scantily studied. To address this, the first part of this study investigated localization-in-noise ability of children vs young adults in two maskers: broadband noise (BBN) and speech-babble (SB) at three signal-to-noise ratios: -12, -6, and 0 dB. In the second part, relationship between binaural medial olivocochlear system (MOC) function and localization-in-noise was investigated. In both studies, 21 children and 21 young adults participated. Results indicate, while children are able to differentiate sounds arriving in the F/B dimension on par with adults in quiet and in BBN, larger differences were found for SB. Accuracy of children's localization in noise (for both maskers) in the lateral plane was also poorer than adults'. Significant differences in binaural MOC interaction (mBIC; the difference between the sum of two monaural- and binaural-MOC strength) between adults and children were also found. For reasons which are not clear, adult F/B localization in BBN correlates better with mBIC while children's F/B localization in SB correlated better with binaural MOC strength.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207