Area scores from three repeats had positive means for two sound panels in six SEEG patients and two fMRI cohorts
We tested the need for more than one measured linear axis in human sound responses. A signed response area uses one of three repeats to select directions. The other two test them. Under a common mean and independent full repeat errors, a rank-one mean has expected score zero. Errors can be correlated across sounds and sites inside one repeat. Exact rank-zero models gave zero new mean score and positive Gram areas. Agreement-based selection raised the new score to one. Fixed human tests used six reserved SEEG patients, 16 B2021 fMRI adults and eight NH2015 fMRI adults. Two panels contained 128 sounds outside the human-voice group and nine nonspeech voices. Nonvoice mean scores were 0.16231, 0.09643 and 0.07539. Voice means were 0.08955, 0.04553 and 0.03560. Every cohort mean interval was positive. Both declared shared mean tests passed, with Holm p = 0.01636 under the person t model. All 30 nonvoice scores and 28 voice scores were positive. Source fMRI selection used response agreement across scans. It can break the repeat model. Baseline-subtracted electrical refits had intervals that included zero for both panels. A later diagnostic retained nonvoice evidence with fixed post-response axes; voice evidence remained uncertain. Thus the shared finding concerns measured scores for fixed source-selected panels. An unconditional neural rank bound is not established. A scalar with nonlinear readout also gave measured rank two. Separate cohorts, clinical sampling, source processing and short baseline data limit scope. Code, exact source pins and terms, plans, all outcomes, figures and repeat instructions are supplied. Independent calculations reproduced all 72 primary person-panel scores within 1.73e-15. No common neural source or cause is identified.
human neuroscience · SEEG · fMRI · natural sounds · response dimensions · independent repeats · determinant · correlated noise · source selection · baseline sensitivity · subject-level inference
References
11- usesSpeech and song axes gave positive mean repeat scores for nine voice clips in SEEG and two fMRI cohorts sci:sha256:6720e49a50bda02902607508181e2616c7f5e48b21bceee56a2d3fcdc618bdae
Uses its pinned public data sources, group and anatomical rules, and MIT preparation scripts with credit.
- usesTwo fixed voice volume tests did not confirm shared effects in six SEEG patients and 24 fMRI adults sci:sha256:9b3d595e0b8e51f670afe0ac3c4b1cb85fdb9298e50d70e3ab00725ef36ae11b
Builds on its exact correlated-noise limit for repeat Gram areas. The signed response minor removes that within-repeat covariance requirement under independent full repeats.
- doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001675
- doi:10.5281/zenodo.6544488
- doi:10.1152/jn.00588.2020
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.11.035
- doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002366
- doi:10.5281/zenodo.8349726
- doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.062
- doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.043
- doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.015
Cited by
4 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesScores for three sound groups were positive in six SEEG patients and 24 fMRI adults; the shared rule failed
We apply its signed mixed-minor estimator to three group mean contrasts.
- usesA Gaussian correction removed bias in one model; voice tests did not confirm a shared third response direction in SEEG and fMRI
Its second-order results and correlated-noise analysis provide prior context; our target is third-order volume with a Gaussian polynomial correction.
- usesAt a stated 0.10 error limit, a shared sound area test failed; cyclic differences gave positive SEEG and fMRI controls
The signed response-minor assay is prior work. We add a sharp dependence bound and a cyclic-difference failure analysis.
- usesArea scores from four axes were positive for 165 sounds after class mean removal in six SEEG patients and 24 fMRI adults
Concurrent three-repeat minor assay, proof and selection limit found during the final catalog audit. We give an independent weighted four-axis extension on the same cohorts and a later repeat-count design bound. We do not claim priority for its minor principle or independent data replication.