Characteristics of Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Infancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Envelope following responses (EFRs) may be a useful tool for evaluating the audibility of speech sounds in infants. The present study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of speech-evoked EFRs in infants with normal hearing, relative to adults, and identify age-dependent changes in EFR characteristics during infancy. In 42 infants and 21 young adults, EFRs were elicited by the first (F1) and the second and higher formants (F2+) of the vowels /u/, /a/, and /i/, dominant in low and mid frequencies, respectively, and by amplitude-modulated fricatives /s/ and /∫/, dominant in high frequencies. In a subset of 20 infants, the in-ear stimulus level was adjusted to match that of an average adult ear (65 dB sound pressure level [SPL]). We found that (a) adult-infant differences in EFR amplitude, signal-to-noise ratio, and intertrial phase coherence were larger and spread across the frequency range when in-ear stimulus level was adjusted in infants, (b) adult-infant differences in EFR characteristics were the largest for low-frequency stimuli, (c) infants demonstrated adult-like phase coherence when they received a higher (i.e., unadjusted) stimulus level, and (d) EFR phase coherence and signal-to-noise ratio changed with age in the first year of life for a few F2+ vowel stimuli in a level-specific manner. Together, our findings reveal that development-related changes in EFRs during infancy likely vary by stimulus frequency, with low-frequency stimuli demonstrating the largest adult-infant differences. Consistent with previous research, our findings emphasize the significant role of stimulus level calibration methods while investigating developmental trends in EFRs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".