MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386167996 · doi:10.1080/25742442.2023.2248849

Neural Responses to Repeated Noise Structure in Sounds Are Invariant to Temporal Interruptions

2023· article· en· W4386167996 on OpenAlexafffund
Björn Herrmann

Bibliographic record

VenueAuditory Perception & Cognition · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsInvariant (physics)Speech recognitionNoise (video)Computer sciencePsychologyAcousticsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to extract meaning from acoustic environments requires sensitivity to repeating sound structures. Yet, how events that repeat are encoded and maintained in the brain and how the brain responds to events that reoccur at later points in time is not well understood. In two electroencephalography experiments, participants listened to a longer, ongoing white-noise sound which comprised shorter, frozen noise snippets that repeated at a regular 2-Hz rate. In several conditions, the snippet repetition discontinued for a brief period after which the noise snippet reoccurred. The experiments aimed to answer whether neural activity becomes entrained by the regular repetition of noise snippets, whether entrained neural activity self-sustains during the discontinuation period, and how the brain responds to a reoccurring noise snippet. Results show that neural activity is entrained by the snippet repetition, but there was no evidence for self-sustained neural activity during the discontinuation period. However, the auditory cortex responded with similar magnitude to a noise snippet reoccurring after a brief discontinuation as it responded to a noise snippet for which the snippet repetition had not been discontinued. This response invariance was observed for different onset times of the reoccurring noise snippet relative to the previously established regularity. The results thus demonstrate that the auditory cortex sensitively responds to, and thus maintains a memory trace of, previously learned acoustic noise independent of temporal interruptions.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAuditory Perception & Cognition→Same topicNeuroscience and Music Perception→French-language works237,207→