Integration of auditory input with vestibular and neck proprioceptive information in the interpretation of dynamic sound localization cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to measure the extent to which vestibular and proprioceptive cues influence processing of dynamic sound localization cues resulting from head rotation, we measured in passive, active, and counter rotation conditions, the ability of normally hearing listeners to localize front/rear sources of low-frequency sounds that typically cannot be accurately localized without head motion. These targets were presented during head rotations and were gated on/off as the head moved through a variable-width spatial window. In the passive condition, information about rotation carried by efference copy was minimized by passively rotating the listener's body with no neck movement, while the subject actively moved their own head on body in the active condition in order to measure for vestibular influence. The proprioceptive input from the neck was isolated by counter-rotating the body relative to the stationary head-in-space in the counter condition, which minimized vestibular input. Performance improved monotonically with increasing spatial window width but decreased as head velocity increased in both passive and active conditions while performance was near chance in the counter condition. These results suggest that among the two sensorimotor cues (vestibular and proprioceptive), only the vestibular inputs are necessary and sufficient to inform the auditory system about head movement.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".