MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411254910 · doi:10.1163/22134808-bja10152

Long-term musical training modulates the body model

2025· article· en· W4411254910 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMultisensory Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPianoTask (project management)PsychologyRepresentation (politics)Musical instrumentTerm (time)Position (finance)Control (management)Cognitive psychologyMusicalMeasure (data warehouse)Body positionCommunicationComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite constantly performing actions with their hands, healthy individuals display distorted hand representations. These distortions have been found in a body representation called 'the body model', which plays a fundamental role in position sense. There is a growing number of studies showing that changes in this representation may optimize performance in certain skills (e.g., magicians, baseball players). This has led to the hypothesis that the distortions may facilitate our actions. One highly trained group of individuals that rely on an accurate position sense about the fingers, are piano players. However, musicians have yet to be studied in the body model task. Therefore, we recruited a group of expert piano players (average practice time 12.85 h/week, average years playing 16.22 ± 3.6) and an age- and sex-matched control group. We hypothesized that piano players would have more accurate hand representation, as precise finger location knowledge is essential for skilled piano performance. Our results showed that piano players were significantly more accurate at estimating hand width compared to the controls; in fact, their estimates of this measure were not different than their physical size. This supports our hypothesis and suggests that the need for more accurate localization of the fingertips when playing may result in a more accurate estimate of hand width in the body model task. There was, however, no difference between the groups for finger length, as both piano and control groups significantly underestimated this measure. This result may reflect the typical position of the hands while playing piano, as the fingers are kept curved to aid proper technique. Taken together, our results support the hypothesis that distortions may in fact facilitate our actions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.116 · 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