standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| second reading | alternatives | an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees |
| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| contribution | contribution | what the paper claims to add |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| object of study | object_of_study | what the paper is about — the thing it investigates |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| research question | research_question | the question the paper sets itself |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
| transfer | transfers | a method or concept carried in from another field |
| unrecordable relation | unhoused_relations | a relation the paper asserts that this vocabulary cannot express, with the reason |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 7 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| object_of_study | whether primary and non-primary auditory cortex encode the temporal shape of the sound envelope on different time scales Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | object_of_study | the paper's words | |
| research_question | whether a functional hierarchy of the kind established in vision for receptive field size exists in audition along the time axis instead Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | research_question | the paper's words | |
| contribution | response duration and the integration time constant that best discriminates sound shape both increase in rank order A1 < VAF < cSRAF, so the non-primary fields carry the same cue on a longer time scale Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | contribution | the paper's words | |
| claim_type | existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | temporal coding of sound envelope shape across auditory cortical fields Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | electrophysiology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: electrophysiology | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | longer response durations in the ventral fields give a downstream reader more time to integrate, so the time constant that best discriminates sound shape is longer there Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | onset spikes carry most of the discrimination in every field, and what is left after they are removed is what separates the fields - the sustained spikes work better in VAF and cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | and pooling compensates for imprecision - performance rises 2 to 3 fold over the average single neuron, with half maximal performance reached from fewer than 10 neurons Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | we CANNOT DISAMBIGUATE potential neural codes for sound burst slope versus duration AS THESE CUES COVARY IN OUR SOUNDS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any code attributed to slope or to duration separately: WE CANNOT DISAMBIGUATE POTENTIAL NEURAL CODES FOR SOUND BURST SLOPE VERSUS DURATION AS THESE CUES COVARY IN OUR SOUNDS | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | we HOLD SPECTRAL AND SPATIAL CUES CONSTANT to examine neural coding of temporal cues in the sound envelope independently Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the scope of the temporal-coding claim: WE HOLD SPECTRAL AND SPATIAL CUES CONSTANT TO EXAMINE NEURAL CODING OF TEMPORAL CUES IN THE SOUND ENVELOPE INDEPENDENTLY | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | TWO CANDIDATE CODES THAT THIS DESIGN CANNOT SEPARATE, SAID OUT LOUD: we CANNOT DISAMBIGUATE potential neural codes for sound burst slope versus duration AS THESE CUES COVARY IN OUR SOUNDS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: distinguishing a code for the slope of the envelope from a code for the duration of the sound burst | limitations[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | the spike-distance metric is biased at long time constants, and the fix is SYNTHETIC DATA - a periodic spike train with matched temporal statistics, extended to 100 s, standing in for the recording Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the spike-distance results at long time constants: AS tau APPROACHES THE TOTAL LENGTH OF THE SPIKE TRAIN (2 s), THE SPIKE DISTANCE IS BIASED AND YIELDS LARGE VALUES | limitations[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | the classifier assumes response bins from different neurons are INDEPENDENT, which the paper states as a design property rather than as a fact about the brain Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the population classification figures: BY DESIGN, THE NAIVE BAYES CLASSIFIER TREATS RESPONSES BINS FROM DIFFERENT NEURONS AS IF THEY ARE INDEPENDENT | limitations[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | the first 500 ms of every spike train is discarded, so every number here is about the ADAPTED STEADY-STATE segment and not about the response to a sound that has just begun Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: every number in the paper, which describes the adapted response and not the onset: FOR ALL DATA ANALYSES, THE FIRST 500 ms WAS REMOVED FROM EACH SPIKE TRAIN TO RESTRICT ANALYSIS TO THE ADAPTED STEADY-STATE SEGMENTS | limitations[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | future exploration will be needed to determine whether classification is even more robust when spectral, temporal and spatial features are COMBINED, and WHEN ANIMALS ARE ATTENDING during a behavioral task, AS HAPPENS IN NATURAL SETTINGS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the generality to combined cues: FUTURE EXPLORATION WILL BE NEEDED TO DETERMINE WHETHER NEURONAL CLASSIFICATION OF SOUND'S TEMPORAL SHAPE IS EVEN MORE ROBUST ... WHEN SPECTRAL, TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL FEATURES ARE COMBINED | limitations[6] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| transfers | a Bernoulli Naive Bayes classifier of McCallum and Nigam 1998, used to READ OUT THE SPIKE TRAINS from individual neurons and CATEGORIZE THE SOUND SHAPE Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[0] | the tagger's words | |
| transfers | the sensitivity index d-prime, a measure of behavioural discriminability, is repurposed to normalize a spike-train distance so that neural discrimination is expressed on a behavioural scale Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[1] | the tagger's words | |
| transfers | the functional hierarchy of successive stages with progressively larger receptive fields, carried from space into the time axis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| transfers | an exponential-kernel spike distance, normalized by trial variance so that it reads as a sensitivity index Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| transfers | a D-prime of 1 corresponds to about 70% accuracy, WHICH IS TYPICALLY CONSIDERED A CRITICAL LIMIT FOR DISCRIMINATING A SIGNAL BEHAVIORALLY Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| transfers | a Bernoulli naive Bayes classifier reading spike trains as bit patterns, with its independence assumption declared and used deliberately Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | the noise carrier varied across trials and across bursts, unfrozen Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: spectral cues and repeated fine structure - THIS GUARANTEES THAT, ON AVERAGE, THE ONLY PHYSICAL CUES AVAILABLE TO EACH NEURON ARISE FROM THE TEMPORAL ENVELOPE · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | spectral and spatial cues held constant across every condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: frequency and location differences contributing to what is read as temporal coding · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | each sound discriminated against itself Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: a metric that returns a positive value for identical inputs - the diagonal of every matrix is zero · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | the spike count distribution tested against a Poisson model before the rate classifier was built on it Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: a rate code scored under a distribution the data do not follow · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | recording depth restricted to 400 to 650 micrometers Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: differences between fields being differences between cortical layers - this is the depth corresponding to layer 4 in each field · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | discrimination Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: discrimination | concepts[9] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | duration Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: duration | concepts[19] | the paper's words | |
| unhoused_relations | slope → duration Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. THE TWO CANNOT BE SEPARATED IN THIS STUDY - the DESIGN form of the negative relation / No edge type can express it: all eight assert that a relation HOLDS. A confounding statement bounds what the paper's own results can mean, and it lives where nothing downstream will find it. PRESERVED HERE BECAUSE THE EDGE IT DEFEATED WAS WITHDRAWN. 'slope --distinct-from--> duration' was retracted in an earlier note of ours for asserting what this sentence denies; without this record the finding would have left the corpus with the edge. 'these cues COVARY in our sounds.' | unhoused_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| unhoused_relations | sound classification performance → temporal imprecision Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. INVERSE ASSOCIATION, ordered across three cortical fields (A1 > VAF > cSRAF): the better the spike-timing classification, the LESS temporally imprecise the responses. No edge type carries polarity, so recording this as 'causes' loses the sign that is the whole finding. | unhoused_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| senses | A HIERARCHY OF TIME SCALES: response durations and optimal time constants for discriminating sound envelope shape INCREASE IN RANK ORDER WITH A1 < VAF < cSRAF, so sustained spiking is more prominent and discrimination more robust in NON-PRIMARY cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | AND THE RANK ORDER REVERSES WITH THE MEASURE: A1 and VAF have significantly HIGHER mean discrimination than cSRAF across all 45 pairs - CONVERSELY cSRAF is better across 30 pairwise comparisons when the sound is slower than 11 Hz. The same three fields, opposite orders, one figure apart Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and reverses again by task: A1 AND VAF OUTPERFORM cSRAF in 10 alternative forced choice classification, where the ranking A1 > VAF > cSRAF is the INVERSE of the time-scale ranking Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and once more by stimulus, inside the pooling analysis: the effect of pooling was GREATER ON AVERAGE IN A1 than in cSRAF, HOWEVER the benefit was GREATER IN cSRAF for two of the longest duration sound bursts - THE ADVANTAGES OF POOLING VARY WITH THE TIME SCALE OF THE SOUND Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | with the inverse relation stated as the finding rather than as a caveat: the ability to classify 10 sound shapes IS Quotation withheld, A1 > VAF > cSRAF - the field that discriminates on the longest time scale classifies worst Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | THE OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF `ONSET SPIKE` IS A WINDOW THAT DIFFERS EIGHTFOLD BETWEEN THE FIELDS BEING COMPARED: the onset response time window is 29.6 ms for A1 and 180.7 ms for cSRAF at the slowest sound, and a single window is measured PER CONDITION AND PER REGION Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: A TABLE IS JOINED INTO THE 'evidence' QUOTE: after the table's title ('Onset response time windows vary…') it runs on through the table's column heads and cells ('f c 2 4 6 8 11 16 …'). The numbers this row states are table cells; read the quote as a title, then a table. | senses[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and the paper says so plainly: onset response time windows VARY WITH SOUND BURST HALF-DURATION AND SLOPE as determined by the sound shaping filter, and are given FOR EACH SOUND BURST VARIATION AND CORTICAL FIELD Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[6] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | A TERM REDEFINED MID-PAPER, EXPLICITLY: onset spikes are a MIXTURE of stimulus-evoked and spontaneous activity, a subset is categorised as spontaneous BY RANDOM SAMPLING against a Poisson criterion, and IN THE REMAINDER OF THIS MANUSCRIPT WE USE THE TERM ONSET SPIKES TO DENOTE THE EVOKED ONSET SPIKES ONLY Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[7] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | SYNTHETIC DATA INSIDE THE MEASUREMENT CHAIN, DECLARED: as the time constant approaches the length of the spike train THE SPIKE DISTANCE IS BIASED, so the spike train was EXTENDED BY SYNTHESIZING a periodic spike train WITH MATCHED TEMPORAL STATISTICS, sampling rate and times from the original, out to 100 s Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[8] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | TWO CANDIDATE CODES THIS DESIGN CANNOT SEPARATE: we CANNOT DISAMBIGUATE potential neural codes for sound burst slope versus duration AS THESE CUES COVARY IN OUR SOUNDS - and the untestable possibility is still stated, that non-primary cortices are more sensitive to duration Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[9] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | an imported threshold that gives the index its meaning: a D-prime of 1 corresponds to about 70% accuracy, WHICH IS TYPICALLY CONSIDERED A CRITICAL LIMIT for discriminating a signal behaviorally - a behavioral criterion borrowed to read a number computed from spikes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[10] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | an assumption declared and then used as a feature: the naive Bayes classifier TREATS RESPONSE BINS FROM DIFFERENT NEURONS AS IF THEY ARE INDEPENDENT, which ALLOWS THE CLASSIFIER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF any independent and nonredundant responses Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[11] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and a scope restriction that is easy to miss: THE FIRST 500 ms WAS REMOVED FROM EACH SPIKE TRAIN to restrict analysis to the ADAPTED STEADY-STATE segments Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[12] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | THE PARAMETER IS THE FINDING: the exponential time constant DETERMINES THE TEMPORAL RESOLUTION OR INTEGRATION TIME of the metric, large values leave mostly slow fluctuations in spike rate and small values make it sensitive to precise timing - the range tested is what lets one number stand for two rival codes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[13] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | SPIKE RATE IS NEAR CHANCE AND SAID TO BE SO: all three fields classify with LOW PERFORMANCE ACCURACY based on spike rate alone, and spike count per 2 s IS NOT AN OPTIMAL NEURAL SIGNAL for coding sound shape Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[14] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and pooling does not rescue it - pooled spike-rate classification is CLOSE TO CHANCE LEVELS in all cortical fields, while the timing-based classifier reaches 80 to 100% Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[15] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | with the number of neurons needed stated per field: HALF MAXIMAL PERFORMANCE from fewer than 10 neurons everywhere, but A1 and VAF require 3 and 5 against 16 for cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[16] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and a resolution limit read off the point where performance drops - a HALF-RESOLUTION LIMIT ON THE ORDER OF 20 ms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[17] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | THE HIERARCHY IS CLAIMED AS DIRECTIONAL: non-primary cortex COULD CERTAINLY POOL RESPONSES FROM A1 to classify sounds BUT THE REVERSE IS LESS LIKELY, and structures reading cSRAF would need longer integration times than structures reading A1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[18] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | A CONCEPT MOVED FROM SPACE TO TIME, AGAIN: functional hierarchies IN THE VISUAL CORTICES support the concept that classifying objects requires successive stages with a PROGRESSIVE INCREASE IN RECEPTIVE FIELD SIZE, and this study supports the idea that A SIMILAR PROGRESSION EXISTS IN AUDITORY CORTICES IN THE TIME DOMAIN Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[19] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | and the specialisation is framed as a trade-off rather than a ranking: A1 has SUPERIOR TEMPORAL RESOLUTION AT THE EXPENSE OF SPECTRAL RESOLUTION, and the non-primary fields the reverse Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[20] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | claim_type: existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: existence — note: a second reading reaching the same value from a different sentence. Not applied - a person decides. | alternatives.claim_type | the tagger's words | |
| alternatives | method: sweep an exponential smoothing time constant from 1 to 256 ms, take the value that maximises a normalised spike-distance discrimination index, and read the same spike trains with a naive Bayes classifier in a 10-alternative task Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: electrophysiology — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides. | alternatives.method | the tagger's words | |
| alternatives | phenomenon: temporally precise spiking that follows the rise, fall and duration of the sound envelope rather than its spectrum Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: temporal coding of sound envelope shape across auditory cortical fields — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides. | alternatives.phenomenon | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → Phillips et al., 2002; Heil, 2003; Zheng and Escabí, 2013; Lee et al., 2016 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | replicates → Malone et al., 2015 (A1 response duration versus sound burst duration) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Larson et al., 2009 (robustness of pairwise discrimination to response jitter) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Van Rossum (2001) spike-distance metric Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → prior work showing that response duration tracks sound envelope shape in A1, by measuring the same thing in two non-primary fields Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | contradicts → the reading that a longer time scale means better sound coding - the field with the longest time scale classifies worst Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: the task: pairwise discrimination against 10-alternative classification | claim_relations[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | supports → a spike-timing code over a spike-rate code, since rate classification stays near chance even when pooled Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[6] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | supports → pooling as compensation for single-neuron imprecision, extended to a field where responses are sluggish and imprecise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[7] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | predicts → that brain structures reading cSRAF need longer integration times than structures reading A1, and that pooling runs from A1 to non-primary rather than the reverse Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[8] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | qualifies → its own hierarchy claim, which holds for time constants and durations but reverses for discrimination and for classification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS WHICH COMPARISON SET, AND THE ORDERING REVERSES BETWEEN THEM. 'A1 and VAF have significantly higher mean discrimination than cSRAF averaged across all 45 pairwise discriminations. Conversely, cSRAF neurons are marginally better at discriminating across 30 pairwise sound comparisons [at low rates].' The same three fields rank one way over one set of comparisons and the other way over a subset - so a hierarchy claim is a claim about the averaging window, and this record's [32] gives the time-constant ordering that does hold. | claim_relations[9] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | A1 —contrasted-with→ cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 | concept_edges[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | A1 —causes→ discrimination Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but A1 and VAF showed HIGHER mean discrimination than cSRAF; causes is loose. also in: A1 · discrimination | concept_edges[6] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | discrimination —operationalised-as→ time constant Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PARAMETER IS THE FINDING - large values leave mostly slow fluctuations in spike rate, small values make the metric sensitive to precise timing, and the sweep is what lets one number stand for two rival codes
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but discrimination was computed FOR EACH time constant to find the optimal one; operationalised-as is loose. also in: discrimination · time constant | concept_edges[17] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | noise —contrasted-with→ envelope Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: the carrier varied unfrozen across trials and bursts, which GUARANTEES THAT ON AVERAGE THE ONLY PHYSICAL CUES AVAILABLE TO EACH NEURON ARISE FROM THE TEMPORAL ENVELOPE
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but noise carriers varied while envelopes were the object of study; contrasted-with is loose. | concept_edges[19] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | spectral —contrasted-with→ envelope Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but spectral cues were held constant to study envelope cues; contrasted-with is loose. | concept_edges[20] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | spike rate —causes→ classification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: spike count or equivalent spike rate per 2 s IS NOT AN OPTIMAL NEURAL SIGNAL for coding sound shape in primary or non-primary cortex
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but classification BASED ON spike rate performed near chance; causes with no direction is loose. also in: spike rate · classification | concept_edges[22] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | VAF —contrasted-with→ cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS THE OPTIMAL TIME CONSTANT, AND THE THREE FIELDS ARE ORDERED ON IT. 'Quotation withheld.' The comparison is made FOR THESE SAME SOUNDS, so the stimulus is held constant and the difference is a property of the fields - and it is an ORDERING, which a binary edge cannot hold: the fact that VAF sits between the other two is the content, and it needs two edges to say. · strength of the relation: 1 | concept_edges[32] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | multiple-comparison correction Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: multiple-comparison correction | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Wilcoxon rank-sum test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Wilcoxon rank-sum test | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | chi-squared test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: chi-squared test | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | bootstrap Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: bootstrap | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | cross-validation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cross-validation | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | regression Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: regression | content_tags.statistics[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | standard error of the mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standard error of the mean | content_tags.statistics[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | effect size / sensitivity index Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: effect size / sensitivity index | content_tags.statistics[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | two-way ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: two-way ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[10] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | Wilcoxon rank-sum Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Wilcoxon rank-sum | content_tags.statistics[11] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | Poisson Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Poisson | content_tags.statistics[12] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | D′ Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: D′ | content_tags.statistics[13] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | Average response duration to the sound bursts grows from primary to ventral non-primary cortex in the order A1, VAF, cSRAF. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The integration time constant that gives best pairwise sound-shape discrimination also grows in the same order A1, VAF, cSRAF, establishing a hierarchy of time scales. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Onset spikes carry most of the discrimination in all three fields, while the later sustained spikes discriminate better in the two non-primary fields than in A1. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Spike timing outperforms spike rate as a code for identifying which of ten envelope shapes was played, in primary and non-primary cortex alike. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | A single neuron's spike timing classifies the ten envelope shapes at roughly 25-40% correct, well above the 10% chance level. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Pooling neuron output raises classification accuracy to a maximum of 80-100%. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Peak response delay lengthens with the envelope shape parameter in all three cortical fields alike. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Response duration tracks envelope shape four times more steeply in VAF and seventeen times more steeply in cSRAF than in A1. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | A1 and VAF reach half-maximal classification by pooling only 3 and 5 neurons respectively, whereas cSRAF needs 16. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | A rate code built from spike counts leaves A1 neurons below 15% correct, close to the 10% chance level. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | response durations and optimal time constants for discriminating sound envelope shape INCREASE IN RANK ORDER WITH A1 < VAF < cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[10] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A1 and VAF have significantly higher mean discrimination than cSRAF across all 45 pairwise discriminations, CONVERSELY cSRAF neurons are marginally better across 30 pairwise comparisons when sound burst f c is <11 Hz Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[11] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A1 AND VAF OUTPERFORM cSRAF in 10 alternative forced choice classification scenarios Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[12] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the effect of pooling was GREATER ON AVERAGE IN A1 than in cSRAF, HOWEVER the benefit of pooling was GREATER IN cSRAF for two of the longest duration sound bursts Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[13] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the ability to classify 10 sound shapes with spike-timing pattern is Quotation withheld, A1 > VAF > cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[14] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | onset response time windows VARY WITH SOUND SHAPE AND ACROSS CORTICAL FIELDS - A1 29.6 where cSRAF is 180.7 at f c of 2 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: A TABLE IS JOINED INTO THE 'evidence' QUOTE: after the table's title ('Onset response time windows vary…') it runs on through the table's column heads and cells ('f c 2 4 6 8 11 16 …'). The numbers this row states are table cells; read the quote as a title, then a table. | content_tags.findings[15] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | onset response time windows VARY WITH SOUND BURST HALF-DURATION AND SLOPE as determined by the sound shaping filter Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[16] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | IN THE REMAINDER OF THIS MANUSCRIPT WE USE THE TERM ONSET SPIKES TO DENOTE THE EVOKED ONSET SPIKES ONLY, after a subset was categorised as spontaneous by random sampling Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[17] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the spike distance IS BIASED as the time constant approaches the length of the spike train, so the train was extended BY SYNTHESIZING a periodic spike train WITH MATCHED TEMPORAL STATISTICS out to 100 s Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[18] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | we CANNOT DISAMBIGUATE potential neural codes for sound burst slope versus duration AS THESE CUES COVARY IN OUR SOUNDS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[19] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the naive Bayes classifier TREATS RESPONSE BINS FROM DIFFERENT NEURONS AS IF THEY ARE INDEPENDENT, by design Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[20] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | THE FIRST 500 ms WAS REMOVED FROM EACH SPIKE TRAIN to restrict analysis to the adapted steady-state segments Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[21] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | spike count or equivalent spike rate per 2 s IS NOT AN OPTIMAL NEURAL SIGNAL for coding sound shape in primary and non-primary auditory cortices Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[22] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | pooled spike-rate classification is CLOSE TO CHANCE LEVELS in all cortical fields while the timing classifier reaches 80 to 100% accuracy Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[23] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A1 and VAF require fewer neurons, 3 and 5, than cSRAF at 16, to reach half maximal classification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[24] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | onset spikes alone discriminate sound shape well in all three fields, WHEREAS SUSTAINED RESPONSES PROVIDE MORE EFFECTIVE DISCRIMINATION IN NON-PRIMARY CORTICES Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[25] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | non-primary cortex COULD CERTAINLY POOL RESPONSES FROM A1 to classify sounds BUT THE REVERSE IS LESS LIKELY Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[26] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | shape temporal cues Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: shape temporal cues | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | encoding time Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: encoding time | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | period histogram Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: period histogram | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | response delay Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response delay | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | response duration Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response duration | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | discrimination index Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: discrimination index | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | onset spikes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: onset spikes | content_tags.definitions[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | sustained spikes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sustained spikes | content_tags.definitions[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | onset Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: onset | content_tags.definitions[9] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | time constant Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: time constant | content_tags.definitions[10] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | envelope Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: envelope | content_tags.definitions[11] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | sound envelope shape Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sound envelope shape | content_tags.variables[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | exponential time constant Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: exponential time constant | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | number of neurons Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: number of neurons | content_tags.variables[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Pairwise sound discrimination indices Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | percentage correct classification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: percentage correct classification | content_tags.variables[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | cortical field Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cortical field | content_tags.variables[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | interaural level difference Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: interaural level difference | content_tags.variables[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | noise carrier Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: noise carrier | content_tags.variables[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | time constant Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: time constant | content_tags.variables[11] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | response duration Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response duration | content_tags.variables[12] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | discrimination Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: discrimination | content_tags.variables[13] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | classification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: classification | content_tags.variables[14] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 223 single neurons from 16 male Brown Norway rats — total sample of recorded units and animals Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 54, 104, and 65 — number of single neurons analysed in A1, VAF and cSRAF respectively Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 19.6 (±0.1), 28.9 (±0.4), 53.6 (±1.9) — mean response duration in ms for A1, VAF and cSRAF averaged over all sound conditions Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 0.97 (± 0.01), 0.98 (±0.01), and 0.92 (±0.01) — mean pairwise discrimination index across all 45 sound pairs in A1, VAF and cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 2 to threefold — increase in classification performance from pooling the neural population relative to the average single neuron Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | −122, −113, and −80, respectively; r 2 = 0.82, 0.83 and 0.89 — log-linear regression slopes and fit quality for peak response delay versus envelope shape in A1, VAF and SRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F (9,1323) = 29.6, p = 0 — effect of sound shape on temporal-classifier performance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 10 different variations — number of envelope shape conditions, spanning fc from 2 to 64 Hz Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 29.6 — onset response time window for A1 at f c of 2, where the cSRAF value in the same row of the same table is 180.7 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[8] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 100 s — the length of the SYNTHESIZED periodic spike train that stands in for the recording so the distance metric is not biased at long time constants Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[9] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 500 ms — the segment removed from the start of every spike train before any analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[10] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 20 ms — the half-resolution limit read off the point where discrimination performance drops Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[11] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 3 and 5 — neurons needed by A1 and VAF for half maximal classification, against 16 for cSRAF Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[12] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.