MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The music of silence. Part II: Music Listening Induces Imagery Responses

2021· article· en· W3190125728 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanni M. Di Liberto, Guilhem Marion, Shihab Shamma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersUniversité de Recherche Paris Sciences et LettresL'Oreal USAAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMelodyActive listeningPsychologySilencePerceptionCognitive psychologyContext (archaeology)Auditory perceptionCommunicationAcousticsMusicalNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During music listening, humans routinely acquire the regularities of the acoustic sequences and use them to anticipate and interpret the ongoing melody. Specifically, in line with this predictive framework, it is thought that brain responses during such listening reflect a comparison between the bottom-up sensory responses and top-down prediction signals generated by an internal model that embodies the music exposure and expectations of the listener. To attain a clear view of these predictive responses, previous work has eliminated the sensory inputs by inserting artificial silences (or sound omissions) that leave behind only the corresponding predictions of the thwarted expectations. Here, we demonstrate a new alternate approach in which we decode the predictive electroencephalography (EEG) responses to the silent intervals that are naturally interspersed within the music. We did this as participants (experiment 1, 20 participants, 10 female; experiment 2, 21 participants, 6 female) listened or imagined Bach piano melodies. Prediction signals were quantified and assessed via a computational model of the melodic structure of the music and were shown to exhibit the same response characteristics when measured during listening or imagining. These include an inverted polarity for both silence and imagined responses relative to listening, as well as response magnitude modulations that precisely reflect the expectations of notes and silences in both listening and imagery conditions. These findings therefore provide a unifying view that links results from many previous paradigms, including omission reactions and the expectation modulation of sensory responses, all in the context of naturalistic music listening. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Music perception depends on our ability to learn and detect melodic structures. It has been suggested that our brain does so by actively predicting upcoming music notes, a process inducing instantaneous neural responses as the music confronts these expectations. Here, we studied this prediction process using EEGs recorded while participants listen to and imagine Bach melodies. Specifically, we examined neural signals during the ubiquitous musical pauses (or silent intervals) in a music stream and analyzed them in contrast to the imagery responses. We find that imagined predictive responses are routinely co-opted during ongoing music listening. These conclusions are revealed by a new paradigm using listening and imagery of naturalistic melodies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Music Perception→French-language works237,207→