No otoacoustic evidence for a peripheral basis of absolute pitch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Absolute pitch (AP) is the ability to identify the perceived pitch of a sound without an external reference. Relatively rare, with an incidence of approximately 1/10,000, the mechanisms underlying AP are not well understood. This study examined otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) to determine if there is evidence of a peripheral (i.e., cochlear) basis for AP. Two OAE types were examined: spontaneous emissions (SOAEs) and stimulus-frequency emissions (SFOAEs). Our motivations to explore a peripheral foundation for AP were several-fold. First is the observation that pitch judgment accuracy has been reported to decrease with age due to age-dependent physiological changes cochlear biomechanics. Second is the notion that SOAEs, which are indirectly related to perception, could act as a fixed frequency reference. Third, SFOAE delays, which have been demonstrated to serve as a proxy measure for cochlear frequency selectivity, could indicate tuning differences between groups. These led us to the hypotheses that AP subjects would (relative to controls) exhibit a. greater SOAE activity and b. sharper cochlear tuning. To test these notions, measurements were made in normal-hearing control (N = 33) and AP-possessor (N = 20) populations. In short, no substantial difference in SOAE activity was found between groups, indicating no evidence for one or more strong SOAEs that could act as a fixed cue. SFOAE phase-gradient delays, measured at several different probe levels (20-50 dB SPL), also showed no significant differences between groups. This observation argues against sharper cochlear frequency selectivity in AP subjects. Taken together, these data support the prevailing view that AP mechanisms predominantly arise at a processing level in the central nervous system (CNS) at the brainstem or higher, not within the cochlea.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".