Temporal Prediction in lieu of Periodic Stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predicting not only what will happen, but also when it will happen is extremely helpful for optimizing perception and action. Temporal predictions driven by periodic stimulation increase perceptual sensitivity and reduce response latencies. At the neurophysiological level, a single mechanism has been proposed to mediate this twofold behavioral improvement: the rhythmic entrainment of slow cortical oscillations to the stimulation rate. However, temporal regularities can occur in aperiodic contexts, suggesting that temporal predictions per se may be dissociable from entrainment to periodic sensory streams. We investigated this possibility in two behavioral experiments, asking human participants to detect near-threshold auditory tones embedded in streams whose temporal and spectral properties were manipulated. While our findings confirm that periodic stimulation reduces response latencies, in agreement with the hypothesis of a stimulus-driven entrainment of neural excitability, they further reveal that this motor facilitation can be dissociated from the enhancement of auditory sensitivity. Perceptual sensitivity improvement is unaffected by the nature of temporal regularities (periodic vs aperiodic), but contingent on the co-occurrence of a fulfilled spectral prediction. Altogether, the dissociation between predictability and periodicity demonstrates that distinct mechanisms flexibly and synergistically operate to facilitate perception and action. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Temporal predictions are increasingly recognized as fundamental instruments for optimizing performance, enabling mammals to exploit regularities in the world. However, the notion of temporal predictions is often confounded with the idea of entrainment to periodic sensory inputs. At the behavioral level, it is also unclear whether perceptual sensitivity and reaction time improvements benefit the same way from temporal predictions and periodic stimulation. In two behavioral experiments on human participants, we find that periodic stimulation facilitates response readiness, whereas temporal predictions improve the precision of auditory processing. This latter effect arises regardless of the nature of temporal regularities (periodic vs aperiodic), but depends on the co-occurrence of a fulfilled spectral prediction.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".