MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246390816 · doi:10.1121/1.3701877

The three-channel model of sound localization mechanisms: Interaural level differences

2012· article· en· W4246390816 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachel N. Dingle, Susan E. Hall, Dennis P. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsAzimuthSound localizationChannel (broadcasting)Receptive fieldAcousticsTone (literature)Interaural time differenceAdaptation (eye)PhysicsNeurophysiologyContrast (vision)Computer scienceNeurosciencePsychologyTelecommunicationsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current understanding of mammalian sound localization is that azimuthal (horizontal) position assignments are dependent upon the relative activation of two populations of broadly-tuned hemifield neurons with overlapping medial borders. Recent psychophysical work has provided evidence for a third channel of low-frequency interaural time difference (ITD)-sensitive neurons tuned to the azimuthal midline. However, the neurophysiological data on free-field azimuth receptive fields, especially of cortical neurons, has primarily studied high-frequency cells whose receptive fields are more likely to have been shaped by interaural level differences (ILDs) than ITDs. In four experiments, a selective adaptation paradigm was used to probe for the existence of a midline channel in the domain of ILDs. If no midline channel exists, symmetrical adaptation of the lateral channels should not result in a shift in the perceived intracranial location of subsequent test tones away from the adaptors because the relative activation of the two channels will remain unchanged. Instead, results indicate a shift in perceived test tone location away from the adaptors, which supports the existence of a midline channel in the domain of ILDs. Interestingly, this shift occurs not only at high frequencies, traditionally associated with ILDs in natural settings, but at low frequencies as well.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207