MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942915414 · doi:10.1101/623231

Binaural Beats through the auditory pathway: from brainstem to connectivity patterns

2019· preprint· en· W2942915414 on OpenAlexaff
Hector Domingo Orozco Perez, Guillaume Dumas, Alexandre Lehmann

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversityCentre for Research on Brain Language and MusicInternational Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinaural recordingAuditory cortexPsychologyNeuroscienceMonauralStimulus (psychology)AudiologyPerceptionBrainstemCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Binaural beating is a perceptual auditory illusion occurring when presenting two neighboring frequencies to each ear separately. Binaural beats have been attributed to several controversial claims regarding their ability to modulate brain activity and mood, in both the scientific literature and the marketing realm. Here, we sought to address those questions in a robust fashion using a single-blind, sham-controlled protocol. To do so, we characterized responses to theta and gamma binaural beats and “sham” stimulation (monaural beats) across four distinct levels: subcortical and cortical entrainment, scalp-level Functional Connectivity and self-reports. Both stimuli elicited standard subcortical responses at the pure tone frequencies of the stimulus (i.e., Frequency Following Response), and entrained the cortex at the beat frequency (i.e., Auditory Steady State Response). Furthermore, Functional Connectivity patterns were modulated differentially by both kinds of stimuli, with binaural beats being the only one eliciting cross-frequency activity. Despite this, we did not find any mood modulation related to our experimental manipulation. Our results provide evidence that binaural beats elicit cross frequency connectivity patterns, but weakly entrain the cortex when compared to a sham stimulus. Whether these patterns have an impact in cognitive performance or other mood measurements remains to be seen. Significance Statement Binaural beats have been a source of speculation and debate in the scientific community. Our study addresses pseudo-scientific marketing claims and approaches them using proper experimental control and state-of-the-art signal processing techniques. Here we show that binaural beats can both entrain the cortex and elicit specific connectivity patterns. Regardless of this, our sham condition was able to entrain the cortex more strongly, and both binaural beats and the sham condition failed to regulate mood. All in all, though binaural beats weakly entrain cortical activity and elicit complex patterns of connectivity, the functional significance (if any) of these patterns remains an open question.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207