ArticleJournal of neural engineering2019
Biometric identification of listener identity from frequency following responses to speech.
Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of Machine Learning on Human Frequency-Following Responses: A Tutorial.Seminars in hearing · 2022Review
- The emergence of idiosyncratic patterns in the frequency-following response during the first year of life.JASA express letters · 2022Article
- The Time-Robustness Analysis of Individual Identification Based on Resting-State EEG.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe investigate the biometric specificity of the frequency following response (FFR), an EEG marker of early auditory processing that reflects phase-locked activity from neural ensembles in the auditory cortex and subcortex (Chandrasekaran and Kraus 2010, Bidelman, 2015a, 2018, Coffey et al 2017b). Our objective is two-fold: demonstrate that the FFR contains information beyond stimulus properties and broad group-level markers, and to assess the practical viability of the FFR as a biometric across different sounds, auditory experiences, and recording days. APPROACH: We trained the hidden Markov model (HMM) to decode listener identity from FFR spectro-temporal patterns across multiple frequency bands. Our dataset included FFRs from twenty native speakers of English or Mandarin Chinese (10 per group) listening to Mandarin Chinese tones across three EEG sessions separated by days. We decoded subject identity within the same auditory context (same tone and session) and across different stimuli and recording sessions. MAIN
resultsThe HMM decoded listeners for averaging sizes as small as one single FFR. However, model performance improved for larger averaging sizes (e.g. 25 FFRs), similarity in auditory context (same tone and day), and lack of familiarity with the sounds (i.e. native English relative to native Chinese listeners). Our results also revealed important biometric contributions from frequency bands in the cortical and subcortical EEG. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study provides the first deep and systematic biometric characterization of the FFR and provides the basis for biometric identification systems incorporating this neural signal.
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.