Mean AUC lower bounds exceeded 0.5 for site errors capped at 5% of training response SD in 20 iEEG patients and 20 fMRI adults
We tested whether sound category transfer survives bounded errors at recording sites. Separate human studies supplied iEEG local field potentials and fMRI BOLD estimates. A model used response ranks across sites. It learned voices without speech and then ranked speech against animal sounds. A pairwise rank identity gave conservative AUC lower bounds for every allowed change to test responses. Each site error was capped at 5% of its training response standard deviation. Errors could differ across all sites and sounds. Four patients supplied development. The fixed reserved test used 20 other patients and 20 fMRI adults. Mean lower bounds were 0.62978 and 0.84088. Their 95% person Student intervals were 0.51688 to 0.74267 and 0.74848 to 0.93329. Both modality mean and sign tests passed; two-claim Holm p was 0.02647. The initial acoustic-error test failed its fixed speech-coverage rule. At a 10% cap, neither modality established a mean bound above 0.5. A score-equivalent common weight change can make separate rank intervals arbitrarily loose. The pair-difference bound avoids this problem. This is a method test on reused cohorts, not new acquisition replication. Different cohorts, sounds, clinical coverage, source selection and measurement filters limit scope. The result does not identify a shared neural cause or a non-acoustic code. The package gives a proof, code, permitted electrical inputs, source versions and terms, all outcomes, figures and repeat steps.
human auditory cortex · intracranial EEG · fMRI · bounded response error · rank decoding · sound category transfer · robustness certificate
References
11- usesSite ranks gave mean speech versus animal AUC above 0.5 after training without speech in 20 iEEG patients and 20 fMRI adults sci:sha256:a5ef832c05cfd2fb1316e3336a3b3fbb4edfebf33108f70c527b561553e3cff7
We reuse its permitted electrical means, sound partitions, auditory-site rule and MIT reader and source retrieval code. We add bounded site-error certificates.
- usesFor two fixed sound panels, neural models trained without speech ranked speech above animal sounds in 20 iEEG patients and 20 fMRI adults sci:sha256:a475145e49c548c9f12b7592bb0fbc3fca3399d536d7b26272b238b0fa65635a
This ancestor established full-value voice transfer and supplied extraction and ridge fitting code inherited through the rank study.
- supportsRank bounds certified 79.7% of equally weighted state decisions in 28 SEEG patients against any finite change to one nonnegative shaft score with fixed calibration sci:sha256:207a598f7dfa5076055d19c7ffb97570627d8433f6ceb07c38ec70501a6e58a9
It separates exact rank decision stability from label accuracy in a different human SEEG task. We do not reuse its data or code.
- supportsA check of two scores gave 27 false guarantees for 10 µV contact errors in 20–30 ms bins in five offline SEEG readers sci:sha256:f7524509c09377a974a2f49aaf2e57e5ed2c321e0ccabd500d703c8f3328414f
It shows why a robustness certificate must cover the full stated error model in a different SEEG reader. We do not reuse its data or code.
- usesdoi:10.5281/zenodo.20599001
Hect et al. public preprocessed iEEG release, version 1.1; CC BY 4.0. Exact selected mean responses and acoustic features are reused.
- usesdoi:10.1016/j.cub.2026.07.063
Source human intracranial voice study and recording context.
- usesdoi:10.1152/jn.00588.2020
Separate B2021 human fMRI study; the analysis uses the 165-sound derivative in the author archive.
- usesdoi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002366
Public author archive supplies the fixed B2021 BOLD derivative. Original arrays remain external.
- usesdoi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.11.035
Source 165-sound labels and acoustic feature panel for the fMRI tests.
- usesdoi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.01.069
Its public repository supplies the fixed acoustic feature array and the named sound-order companion, not its electrode neural responses.
- doi:10.48550/arXiv.1810.12715
General prior work on conservative interval robustness bounds; we do not claim that interval certification is new.
Cited by
1 publicationPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.