Crossmodal Phase Reset and Evoked Responses Provide Complementary Mechanisms for the Influence of Visual Speech in Auditory Cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural conversation is multisensory: when we can see the speaker's face, visual speech cues improve our comprehension. The neuronal mechanisms underlying this phenomenon remain unclear. The two main alternatives are visually mediated phase modulation of neuronal oscillations (excitability fluctuations) in auditory neurons and visual input-evoked responses in auditory neurons. Investigating this question using naturalistic audiovisual speech with intracranial recordings in humans of both sexes, we find evidence for both mechanisms. Remarkably, auditory cortical neurons track the temporal dynamics of purely visual speech using the phase of their slow oscillations and phase-related modulations in broadband high-frequency activity. Consistent with known perceptual enhancement effects, the visual phase reset amplifies the cortical representation of concomitant auditory speech. In contrast to this, and in line with earlier reports, visual input reduces the amplitude of evoked responses to concomitant auditory input. We interpret the combination of improved phase tracking and reduced response amplitude as evidence for more efficient and reliable stimulus processing in the presence of congruent auditory and visual speech inputs. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Watching the speaker can facilitate our understanding of what is being said. The mechanisms responsible for this influence of visual cues on the processing of speech remain incompletely understood. We studied these mechanisms by recording the electrical activity of the human brain through electrodes implanted surgically inside the brain. We found that visual inputs can operate by directly activating auditory cortical areas, and also indirectly by modulating the strength of cortical responses to auditory input. Our results help to understand the mechanisms by which the brain merges auditory and visual speech into a unitary perception.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".