Decoding kinematic information from beta-band motor rhythms of speech motor cortex: A methodological/analytic approach using concurrent speech movement tracking and magnetoencephalography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Articulography and functional neuroimaging are two major tools for studying the neurobiology of speech production. Until now, however, it has generally not been feasible to use both in the same experimental setup because of technical incompatibilities between the two methodologies. Here we describe results from a novel articulography system dubbed Magneto-articulography for the Assessment of Speech Kinematics (MASK; Alves et al., 2016), which is technically compatible with magnetoencephalography (MEG) brain scanning systems. In the present paper we describe our methodological and analytic approach for extracting brain motor activities related to key kinematic and coordination event parameters derived from time-registered MASK tracking measurements (Anastasopoulou et al., 2022). Data were collected from ten healthy adults with tracking coils on the tongue, lips, and jaw. Analyses targeted the gestural landmarks of reiterated utterances /ipa/ and /api/, produced at normal and faster rates (Anastasopoulou et al., 2022; Van Lieshout, 2007). The results show that (1) Speech sensorimotor cortex can be reliably located in peri-rolandic regions of the left hemisphere; (2) mu (8-12 Hz) and beta band (13-30 Hz) neuromotor oscillations are present in the speech signals and contain information structures that are independent of those present in higher-frequency bands; and (3) hypotheses concerning the information content of speech motor rhythms can be systematically evaluated with multivariate pattern analytic techniques. These results show that MASK provides the capability, for deriving subject-specific articulatory parameters, based on well-established and robust motor control parameters, in the same experimental setup as the MEG brain recordings and in temporal and spatial co-register with the brain data. The analytic approach described here provides new capabilities for testing hypotheses concerning the types of kinematic information that are encoded and processed within specific components of the speech neuromotor system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".