Measuring temporal response properties of auditory nerve fibers in cochlear implant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditory nerve fibers' (ANFs) refractoriness and facilitation can be quantified in electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) recorded via neural response telemetry (NRT). Although facilitation has been observed in animals and human cochlear implant (CI) recipients, no study has modeled this in human CI users until now. In this study, recovery and facilitation effects at different masker and probe levels for three test electrodes (E6, E12 and E18) in 11 CI subjects were recorded. The ECAP recovery and facilitation were modeled by exponential functions and the same function used for +10 CL masker offset condition can be applied to all other masker offsets measurements. Goodness of fit was evaluated for the exponential functions. A significant effect of probe level was observed on a recovery time constant which highlights the importance of recording the recovery function at the maximum acceptable stimulus level. Facilitation time constant and amplitude showed no dependency on the probe level. However, facilitation was stronger for masker level at or around the threshold of the ECAP (T-ECAP). There was a positive correlation between facilitation magnitude and amplitude growth function (AGF) slope, which indicates that CI subjects with better peripheral neural survival have stronger facilitation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".