Extent of lateralization of click trains elicited by interaural time differences—A comparison of measurement paradigms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extent of lateralization measurements have previously been performed for various stimulus types, mainly using two measurement paradigms: (1) an acoustic pointer paradigm where the interaural level difference of a pointer stimulus is adjusted to match the intracranial position of a target stimulus and (2) a visual pointer paradigm where the intracranial position of a target stimulus is indicated on a linear scale. Both measurement paradigms are widely used, but rarely within the same study. In this study, the extent of lateralization elicited by unfiltered as well as 4 kHz bandpass-filtered click trains carrying interaural time differences (ITDs) up to 3 ms was measured using an acoustic as well as a visual pointer paradigm. Data from six young normal-hearing listeners were compared. Using the visual pointer paradigm, the extent of lateralization behavior as a function of stimulus ITD for unfiltered as well as bandpass filtered click trains coincided. The extent of lateralization as determined by the acoustic pointer paradigm, however, showed systematic differences at ITDs between 0.2 ms and 1 ms: filtered click trains were matched to smaller pointer ILDs than unfiltered click trains. Caveats and usability of both measurement paradigms will be discussed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".