ArticlePLoS computational biology2018
Origins of scale invariance in vocalization sequences and speech.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noise statistics drive background- and channel-specific interference in auditory midbrain representations of speech.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Interference of Mid-level Speech and Noise Statistics Underlies Human Speech Recognition Sensitivity in Natural Environmental Noise.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Two stages of bandwidth scaling drives efficient neural coding of natural sounds.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Spiking network optimized for word recognition in noise predicts auditory system hierarchy.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Best sensitivity of temporal modulation transfer functions in laboratory mice matches the amplitude modulation embedded in vocalizations.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- A neural ensemble correlation code for sound category identification.PLoS biology · 2019Article
- Neural timing of stimulus events with microsecond precision.PLoS biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To communicate effectively animals need to detect temporal vocalization cues that vary over several orders of magnitude in their amplitude and frequency content. This large range of temporal cues is evident in the power-law scale-invariant relationship between the power of temporal fluctuations in sounds and the sound modulation frequency (f). Though various forms of scale invariance have been described for natural sounds, the origins and implications of scale invariant phenomenon remain unknown. Using animal vocalization sequences, including continuous human speech, and a stochastic model of temporal amplitude fluctuations we demonstrate that temporal acoustic edges are the primary acoustic cue accounting for the scale invariant phenomenon. The modulation spectrum of vocalization sequences and the model both exhibit a dual regime lowpass structure with a flat region at low modulation frequencies and scale invariant 1/f2 trend for high modulation frequencies. Moreover, we find a time-frequency tradeoff between the average vocalization duration of each vocalization sequence and the cutoff frequency beyond which scale invariant behavior is observed. These results indicate that temporal edges are universal features responsible for scale invariance in vocalized sounds. This is significant since temporal acoustic edges are salient perceptually and the auditory system could exploit such statistical regularities to minimize redundancies and generate compact neural representations of vocalized sounds.
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.