Electrophysiological responses of audiovisual integration from infancy to adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our ability to merge information from different senses into a unified percept is a crucial perceptual process for efficient interaction with our multisensory environment. Yet, the developmental process underlying how the brain implements multisensory integration remains poorly known. This cross-sectional study aims to characterize the developmental patterns of audiovisual events in 131 individuals aged 3 months to 30 years. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded during a passive task, including audiovisual, auditory, and visual stimulations. Different developmental patterns are seen for the audiovisual, auditory, and visual responses, with the visual and audiovisual responses reaching maturity between 11 and 14 years old and the auditory response reaching maturity a few years later, between 15 and 17 years old. Topographic distributions reveal distinct audiovisual developmental patterns across age groups. Specifically, from 3 months to 7 years old, audiovisual interaction emerges in the left temporo-parietal regions and reaches the medial frontal area between 8 and 10 years old, followed by a mature fronto-central pattern from 11 years old. Our results show that response to the bimodal events is a long developmental process that emerges during childhood and continues to develop during adolescence.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".