4.7 Article

Multiscale temporal integration organizes hierarchical computation in human auditory cortex

期刊

NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 455-+

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01261-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [NIDCD-K99-DC018051, NIDCD-R01-DC014279, S10 OD018211, NINDS-R01-NS084142, NIDCD-R01-DC018805]
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute (LSRF postdoctoral award)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The human brain integrates information across multiple timescales to derive meaning from sound. Our study reveals that the auditory cortex hierarchically integrates across diverse timescales ranging from 50 to 400 ms, and different neural populations with short and long integration windows exhibit distinct functional properties.
To derive meaning from sound, the brain must integrate information across many timescales. What computations underlie multiscale integration in human auditory cortex? Evidence suggests that auditory cortex analyses sound using both generic acoustic representations (for example, spectrotemporal modulation tuning) and category-specific computations, but the timescales over which these putatively distinct computations integrate remain unclear. To answer this question, we developed a general method to estimate sensory integration windows-the time window when stimuli alter the neural response-and applied our method to intracranial recordings from neurosurgical patients. We show that human auditory cortex integrates hierarchically across diverse timescales spanning from similar to 50 to 400 ms. Moreover, we find that neural populations with short and long integration windows exhibit distinct functional properties: short-integration electrodes (less than similar to 200 ms) show prominent spectrotemporal modulation selectivity, while long-integration electrodes (greater than similar to 200 ms) show prominent category selectivity. These findings reveal how multiscale integration organizes auditory computation in the human brain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据