The entrainment of EEG delta oscillations in speech listening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on the sensory entrainment of neural oscillations provides a novel way of understanding how the brain processes spoken language without postulates of interim linguistic units. Several reports have shown that oscillations in the theta range (3-10 Hz) are entrained by syllable-size modulations in the energy envelope of speech. This entrainment has recently been shown to provide sensory frames in processing feature-related cues. A similar perspective has been applied to delta waves (< 3 Hz). Thus, it is suggested that delta entrains to long (“sentence”-size) energy contours, and this would provide processing frames involved in utterance comprehension. The present paper adopts a different viewpoint based on our previous work showing that delta-size perceptual chunks in speech relate to an online sensory memory of sequential information. We used electro-encephalography (EEG) to monitor listeners (n=18) on-line responses to utterance stimuli with controlled patterns of energy, pitch, and temporal marks. Measures of inter-trial phase coherence in neural oscillations show that delta specifically entrains to temporal chunks in the stimuli. This supports a view that delta is not entrained by sentence-size patterns but by perceptual chunks which provide sensory frames in processing incoming sequential information in heard speech.
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".