Frequency tagging to track the neural processing of contrast in fast, continuous sound sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human auditory system presents a remarkable ability to detect rapid changes in fast, continuous acoustic sequences, as best illustrated in speech and music. However, the neural processing of rapid auditory contrast remains largely unclear, probably due to the lack of methods to objectively dissociate the response components specifically related to the contrast from the other components in response to the sequence of fast continuous sounds. To overcome this issue, we tested a novel use of the frequency-tagging approach allowing contrast-specific neural responses to be tracked based on their expected frequencies. The EEG was recorded while participants listened to 40-s sequences of sounds presented at 8Hz. A tone or interaural time contrast was embedded every fifth sound (AAAAB), such that a response observed in the EEG at exactly 8 Hz/5 (1.6 Hz) or harmonics should be the signature of contrast processing by neural populations. Contrast-related responses were successfully identified, even in the case of very fine contrasts. Moreover, analysis of the time course of the responses revealed a stable amplitude over repetitions of the AAAAB patterns in the sequence, except for the response to perceptually salient contrasts that showed a buildup and decay across repetitions of the sounds. Overall, this new combination of frequency-tagging with an oddball design provides a valuable complement to the classic, transient, evoked potentials approach, especially in the context of rapid auditory information. Specifically, we provide objective evidence on the neural processing of contrast embedded in fast, continuous sound sequences. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Recent theories suggest that the basis of neurodevelopmental auditory disorders such as dyslexia might be an impaired processing of fast auditory changes, highlighting how the encoding of rapid acoustic information is critical for auditory communication. Here, we present a novel electrophysiological approach to capture in humans neural markers of contrasts in fast continuous tone sequences. Contrast-specific responses were successfully identified, even for very fine contrasts, providing direct insight on the encoding of rapid auditory information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".