ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2017
Modeling signal propagation in the human cochlea.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Including two-dimensional pressure-focusing in transmission-line cochlear models.JASA express letters · 2026Article
- Modeling the Influence of Bandwidth and Envelope on Categorical Loudness Scaling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A canonical oscillator model of cochlear dynamics.Hearing research · 2019Article
- Constraints imposed by zero-crossing invariance on cochlear models with two mechanical degrees of freedom.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Article
- Nonlinear cochlear mechanics without direct vibration-amplification feedback.Physical review researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The level-dependent component of the latency of human auditory brainstem responses (ABR) to tonebursts decreases by about 38% for every 20-dB increase in stimulus level over a wide range of both frequency and level [Neely, Norton, Gorga, and Jesteadt (1998). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 87-97]. This level-dependence has now been simulated in an active, nonlinear, transmission-line model of cochlear mechanics combined with an adaptation stage. The micromechanics in this model are similar to previous models except that a dual role is proposed for the tectorial membrane (TM): (1) passive sharpening the tuning of sensory-cell inputs (relative to basilar-membrane vibrations) and (2) providing an optimal phase shift (relative to basilar-membrane vibrations) of outer-hair-cell feedback forces, so that amplification is restricted to a limited range of frequencies. The adaptation stage, which represents synaptic adaptation of neural signals, contributes to the latency level-dependence more at low frequencies than at high frequencies. Compression in this model spans the range of audible sound levels with a compression ratio of about 2:1. With further development, the proposed model of cochlear micromechanics could be useful both (1) as a front-end to functional models of the auditory system and (2) as a foundation for understanding the physiological basis of cochlear amplification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.