Distinct and content-specific neural representations of self- and other-produced actions in joint piano performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During ensemble performance, musicians predict their own and their partners’ action outcomes to smoothly coordinate in real time. The neural auditory-motor system is thought to contribute to these predictions by running internal forward models that simulate self- and other-produced actions slightly ahead of time. What remains elusive, however, is whether and how own and partner actions can be represented simultaneously and distinctively in the sensorimotor system, and whether these representations are content-specific . Here, we applied multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) to functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data of duetting pianists to dissociate the neural representation of self- and other-produced actions during synchronous joint music performance. Expert pianists played familiar right-hand melodies in a 3 T MR-scanner, in duet with a partner who played the corresponding left-hand basslines in an adjacent room. In half of the pieces, pianists were motorically familiar (or unfamiliar) with their partner’s left-hand part. MVPA was applied in primary motor and premotor cortices (M1, PMC), cerebellum, and planum temporale of both hemispheres to classify which piece was performed. Classification accuracies were higher in left than right M1, reflecting the content-specific neural representation of self-produced right-hand melodies. Notably, PMC showed the opposite lateralization, with higher accuracies in the right than left hemisphere, likely reflecting the content-specific neural representation of other-produced left-hand basslines. Direct physiological support for the representational alignment of partners’ M1 and PMC should be gained in future studies using novel tools like interbrain representational similarity analyses. Surprisingly, motor representations in PMC were similarly precise irrespective of familiarity with the partner’s part. This suggests that expert pianists may generalize contents of familiar actions to unfamiliar pieces with similar musical structure, based on the auditory perception of the partner’s part. Overall, these findings support the notion of parallel, distinct, and content-specific self and other internal forward models that are integrated within cortico-cerebellar auditory-motor networks to support smooth coordination in musical ensemble performance and possibly other forms of social interaction.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".