phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | feature-selective auditory attention— “In order to illuminate how A1 supports flexible perception in rich acoustic environments, we recorded from A1 neurons while rhesus macaques performed a feature-selective attention task.” | |
| claim-type | mechanism— “Rather, these results suggest that sound-encoding in A1 relies on synergies among neurons, and these synergies support the neural code for selective listening.” | |
| method — evidence | — “We recorded from 92 A1 neurons of two adult rhesus macaques, one female (W, 8 kg) and one male (U, 12 kg).” | |
| transfer | from psychophysics: per-subject psychophysical detection thresholds measured beforehand and used to set the stimulus values for single-unit recording, so neural responses are read against each animal's own perceptual scale— “The precise AM and ∆BW values used during recording sessions were tailored to each subject’s psychophysical thresholds for detection of each sound feature (AM and ∆BW) in isolation, determined prior to recording.” | transfers[0] |
| mechanism | Because feature tuning co-varies within single neurons, a gain applied to individual cells cannot separate the two features; only re-weighting neurons at the population level recovers a feature-specific signal.— “In other words, A1 neurons rarely uniquely encode one sound feature or the other because feature tuning co-varies at the single-neuron level (similar to Fig. 3e-h). This prevents single-neuron tuning from providing a robust basis for attentional perceptual enhancement.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Mixed selectivity cancels the average effect of feature-specific gain, which is why single-neuron measures show nothing while the population does.— “Thus, when single neurons exhibit mixed selectivity in their tuning to different sensory features, FSG as a mechanism of attention exhibits no average attentional enhancement (Fig. 3g,h).” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | The attentional benefit is carried by higher-order correlations among neurons, i.e. it is an emergent property of the ensemble rather than a sum of single-cell effects.— “This suggests that our observed population enhancement of sound feature encoding constitutes an emergent effect, relying on higher-order correlations among A1 neurons.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | Population coding unfolds in stages over the stimulus: a fast feature-general change detection followed by finer feature discrimination.— “These temporal dynamics suggest that early population responses function to detect a rapid change, irrespective of feature, whereas sustained responses elicit finer-grained feature selectivity.” | mechanisms[3] |
| contradicts | Niwa et al. (2012b), Schwartz and David (2017) and von Trapp et al. (2016), which reported attention-related changes in A1 single-neuron tuning— “Therefore, when comparing feature tuning across the more rigorous demands of different feature attention conditions, we do not observe tuning changes that have been found in several prior studies comparing A1 tuning between passive vs. active conditions and between attend-toward vs. attend-away conditions (Niwa et al., 2012b; Schwartz and… | claim_relations[0] |
| builds-on | Mante et al. (2013) and Rigotti et al. (2013) population-level analyses of prefrontal cortex— “This prompted us to conduct a population-level analysis, inspired by studies performed in PFC (Mante et al., 2013; Rigotti et al., 2013), to make sense of the heterogeneous single-neuron representations.” | claim_relations[1] |
| sense | sensory representation - AT THE SINGLE-NEURON LEVEL: not enhanced by attention in these data, which is the paper's own negative result— “attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation of attended features in our data.” | senses[0] |
| sense | sensory representation - AT THE POPULATION LEVEL: enhanced, tracking behaviour, and described as an emergent code NOT MEASURABLE at the single-neuron level— “These results suggest that an emergent population code not measurable at the single-neuron level might constitute the functional unit of sensory representation in PSC.” | senses[1] |
| sense | psychophysical threshold - defined as the modulation level at which the subject's measured d-prime equals 1, so the condition is fixed by sensitivity rather than by the stimulus— “one near psychophysical threshold (defined as the modulation level at which the subject’s sensitivity, measured using d’ (Wickens, 2002) was equal to 1)” | senses[2] |
| sense | `conditions` / `variables` - THE TWO MOST GENERIC WORDS IN EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCE, BOTH STIPULATED LOCALLY AND IN ONE BREATH. `in the present study we refer to “conditions” as distinct combinations of AM, ∆BW and context ... We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary.` Neither word is being used oddly - both are being pinned, because the analysis needs 26 of one and 3 of the other and the ordinary senses would collapse them. `in the present study` is the paper marking the scope of its own stipulation, which is exactly the marker a cross-paper corpus needs and almost never gets. A tag joining this record's `variables` to another paper's `variables` would join 3 dimensions to a table of measurements.— “in the present study we refer to “conditions” as distinct combinations of AM, ∆BW and context, such that we have 26 total experimental conditions (13 AM*∆BW combinations across two attention conditions). We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary, namely the two sound features (AM, ∆BW) and context… | senses[3] |
| control | the AM frequency presented on each trial chosen AT RANDOM rather than adaptively — held — rules out SAMPLING BIAS TOWARDS THE CELLS THE EXPERIMENT IS ABOUT - searching for a frequency that drives the neuron finds AM-sensitive cells and quietly leaves the bandwidth-sensitive ones out of the population being described— “We chose to randomly select the presented AM frequency to avoid biasing our recordings toward AM-sensitive neurons at the expense of sampling from ∆BW-sensitive neurons.” | controls[0] |
| edge | single-neuron representation —contrasted-with→ population code— “attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation of attended features in our data. However, a population-level analysis reveals that ensembles of neurons exhibit enhanced encoding of attended sound features, and this population code tracks subjects’ performance.” | concept_edges[0] |
| note | variables —distinct-from→ conditions — The paper separates them by construction - conditions are combinations, variables are the axes those combinations range over, 26 against 3. Cue: 'distinct' appears in the conditions clause and the whole span is one stipulation.— “in the present study we refer to “conditions” as distinct combinations of AM, ∆BW and context, such that we have 26 total experimental conditions (13 AM*∆BW combinations across two attention conditions). We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary, namely the two sound features (AM, ∆BW) and context… | concept_edges[1] |
| relation | variables —distinct-from→ conditions — We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary— “in the present study we refer to “conditions” as distinct combinations of AM, ∆BW and context, such that we have 26 total experimental conditions (13 AM*∆BW combinations across two attention conditions). We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary, namely the two sound features (AM, ∆BW) and context… | concept_edges[1] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — a single-neuron measurement used to decide whether attention enhances sensory encoding: in these data it does not, while the population-level analysis of the same recordings shows that it does— “attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation of attended features in our data. However, a population-level analysis reveals that ensembles of neurons exhibit enhanced encoding of attended sound features, and this population code tracks subjects’ performance.” | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — pooling or comparing the two subjects at 'the same' stimulus level: the AM and ∆BW values were tailored per subject to that subject's own psychophysical thresholds— “The precise AM and ∆BW values used during recording sessions were tailored to each subject’s psychophysical thresholds for detection of each sound feature (AM and ∆BW) in isolation, determined prior to recording.” | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — the near/above-threshold conditions as physical stimulus levels: they are defined by the subject's measured sensitivity, at d-prime = 1, ~1.2 and >1.5— “Three values of each feature were used in recording sessions: one near psychophysical threshold (defined as the modulation level at which the subject’s sensitivity, measured using d’ (Wickens, 2002) was equal to 1), one slightly above threshold (d’ ~ 1.2), and one well above threshold (d’> 1.5).” | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — the unit count in this study: 58 single units held for only two blocks are included, and the authors report that removing them does not qualitatively change the results— “Removing SUs with only 2 experimental blocks of isolation (n = 58) from analysis does not qualitatively affect our results nor main conclusions and interpretations.” | limitations[7] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | The analysis uses only firing rate, not spike timing.— “An important consideration of the present report is our exclusive use of firing rate, as opposed to spike-timing measures of neural activity.” | limitations[0] |
| limitation | Because many bandwidth targets were also amplitude-modulated, phase locking could signal a target in both attention conditions, so the task may not have been demanding enough to reveal attentional effects on spike timing.— “It is important to note that the design of our task is such that, even when attending to the spectral feature, many target sounds are temporally modulated as well, and therefore phase-locking can signal the presence of a target in both attention conditions.” | limitations[1] |
| limitation | Neurons were pooled across sessions and trials resampled, so real correlated and intrinsic variability had to be reintroduced by modelling rather than measured simultaneously.— “An important consideration with this approach is that, by combining neurons across experimental sessions, and by randomly re-sampling trials, we fail to approximate correlated and intrinsic variability between and within neurons, respectively.” | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The task may be too easy to force attention-related changes in A1 temporal dynamics.— “Thus, the present task may not sufficiently challenge the auditory system to drive attention-related changes in the temporal dynamics of A1 neurons’ spiking.” | limitations[3] |
| limitation | The two levels of analysis disagree on the same data: attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation, while the population analysis shows enhanced encoding.— “attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation of attended features in our data. However, a population-level analysis reveals that ensembles of neurons exhibit enhanced encoding of attended sound features, and this population code tracks subjects’ performance.” | limitations[4] |
| limitation | The physical stimulus differs between animals, because the values were tailored to each subject's own psychophysical thresholds rather than fixed.— “The precise AM and ∆BW values used during recording sessions were tailored to each subject’s psychophysical thresholds for detection of each sound feature (AM and ∆BW) in isolation, determined prior to recording.” | limitations[5] |
| limitation | The condition labels are defined by a sensitivity criterion, not by a physical quantity: 'near threshold' means the level at which d-prime equals 1.— “Three values of each feature were used in recording sessions: one near psychophysical threshold (defined as the modulation level at which the subject’s sensitivity, measured using d’ (Wickens, 2002) was equal to 1), one slightly above threshold (d’ ~ 1.2), and one well above threshold (d’> 1.5).” | limitations[6] |
| limitation | An inclusion decision was made and checked, and the check is reported rather than the criterion being justified in advance.— “Removing SUs with only 2 experimental blocks of isolation (n = 58) from analysis does not qualitatively affect our results nor main conclusions and interpretations.” | limitations[7] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | Individual A1 neurons carried mixed selectivity, encoding both the spectral and temporal sound features and the attention condition.— “We find that single neurons tend to be highdimensional, in that they exhibit substantial mixed selectivity for both sound features, as well as task context.” | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | Attention produced no average enhancement of feature encoding in single A1 neurons.— “Contrary to common findings in many previous experiments, attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation of attended features in our data.” | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Neurons were as likely to increase as to decrease their AM ROC area across attention conditions (p = 0.74).— “Though we do observe some scatter around the unity line, neurons increase or decrease their AM ROC area with equal likelihood, (sign rank test, p = 0.74).” | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Context had a significant main effect in more neurons than either acoustic feature.— “Context had a significant main effect in more neurons than either acoustic feature, as measured by the proportion of neurons with significant context coefficients” | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | After targeted dimensionality reduction, the population code decoded each sound feature better when that feature was attended. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | The attentional advantage in the population code was large and highly reliable across simulated populations. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | The observed attentional modulation exceeded that of every surrogate population in which higher-order correlations had been destroyed. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | AM-axis population projections were significantly related to task performance (mean choice probability 0.573). | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | Both monkeys weighted the attended feature more heavily than the unattended one in their yes/no reports. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | Attention did not alter spike timing: phase locking to the temporal envelope was unaffected by the attention condition. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| finding | Population trajectories began with an early non-selective course in which each stimulus projected to about the same region of the subspace. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[11] |
| quantity | 92 — single A1 neurons recorded, from two rhesus macaques Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 0.151 — average increase in population ROC area for AM when AM was the attended feature Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | p = 0.73 and 0.74 — sign rank p-values showing no attentional change in single-neuron BW and AM sensitivity Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | 0.633 (p=1.12e-61) — mean choice probability for projections into the full three-dimensional task-variable subspace Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 1000 — surrogate populations built with intact single-neuron tuning but destroyed higher-order correlations Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | 26 (13 x 2) — total experimental conditions, being 13 sound combinations crossed with two attention blocks Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | 47 total sessions, p = 8.98e-8 — behavioural sessions and the sign rank p-value showing attention shifted the animals' feature weighting Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| quantity | n = 434 pairs — simultaneously recorded neuron pairs used to estimate the noise correlations imposed on simulated populations Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[7] |
| quantity | 65 dB SPL — calibrated presentation level of every sound stimulus at the outer ear Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[8] |
| quantity | 400 ms — duration of each of the two sounds in a trial Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[9] |
| variable | task context (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[0] |
| variable | AM depth (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[1] |
| variable | spectral bandwidth (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| variable | trial-by-trial spike count (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[3] |
| variable | behavioral report (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| variable | AM frequency (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[5] |
| variable | noise correlations (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[8] |
| variable | neuron-intrinsic variability (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[9] |
| definition | targeted dimensionality reduction (TDR) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | de-mixing Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | feature-specific gain (FSG) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | ROC area Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | choice probability (CP) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | surrogate population Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[6] |
| concept | population code Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | single-neuron representation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | psychophysical threshold Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | conditions — not defined in this paper's own words; PAPER-LOCAL: the 26 distinct combinations of AM, dBW and attentional context - not the ordinary methodological sense of 'experimental condition', and the paper stipulates it because the two would otherwise be read as the same Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| concept | variables — not defined in this paper's own words; PAPER-LOCAL: exactly three - the two sound features and context - i.e. the DIMENSIONS ALONG WHICH conditions vary, not the measured quantities Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| logistic regression | as written: binomial logistic regression model Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| multiple linear regression | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| Wilcoxon signed rank test | as written: sign rank test Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| ROC / signal detection analysis | as written: area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC area) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| bootstrap | as written: bootstrapping approach Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
| Spearman correlation r | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[5] |
| t-test t | as written: single-distribution t-test Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[6] |
| support vector machine with held-out test set | as written: linear support vector machine was fit to a training set Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[7] |
| Fano factor (variance-to-mean ratio) | as written: Fano factor (variance/mean rate) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[8] |
| principal component analysis | as written: principal component analysis-based spike sorting Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[9] |
| z-score standardisation | as written: z-scoring spike count distributions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[10] |
| linear regression | as written: fitting a linear regression to those noise correlation values Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[11] |
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.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824