ArticleHearing research2019
A canonical oscillator model of cochlear dynamics.
Article in Hearing research, 2019. 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.
- Musical neurodynamics.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Something in Our Ears Is Oscillating, but What? A Modeller's View of Efforts to Model Spontaneous Emissions.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2024Review
- Modelling of Musical Perception using Spectral Knowledge Representation.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Modeling the tonotopic map using a two-dimensional array of neural oscillators.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- Oscillatory Entrainment of the Frequency-following Response in Auditory Cortical and Subcortical Structures.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Multifrequency Hebbian plasticity in coupled neural oscillators.Biological cybernetics · 2021Article
- Hearing at threshold intensities: by slow mechanical traveling waves or by fast cochlear fluid pressure waves.Audiology research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nonlinear responses to acoustic signals arise through active processes in the cochlea, which has an exquisite sensitivity and wide dynamic range that can be explained by critical nonlinear oscillations of outer hair cells. Here we ask how the interaction of critical nonlinearities with the basilar membrane and other organ of Corti components could determine tuning properties of the mammalian cochlea. We propose a canonical oscillator model that captures the dynamics of the interaction between the basilar membrane and organ of Corti, using a pair of coupled oscillators for each place along the cochlea. We analyze two models in which a linear oscillator, representing basilar membrane dynamics, is coupled to a nonlinear oscillator poised at a Hopf instability. The coupling in the first model is unidirectional, and that of the second is bidirectional. Parameters are determined by fitting 496 auditory-nerve (AN) tuning curves of macaque monkeys. We find that the unidirectionally and bidirectionally coupled models account equally well for threshold tuning. In addition, however, the bidirectionally coupled model exhibits low-amplitude, spontaneous oscillation in the absence of stimulation, predicting that phase locking will occur before a significant increase in firing frequency, in accordance with well known empirical observations. This leads us to a canonical oscillator cochlear model based on the fundamental principles of critical nonlinear oscillation and coupling dynamics. The model is more biologically realistic than widely used linear or nonlinear filter-based models, yet parsimoniously displays key features of nonlinear mechanistic models. It is efficient enough for computational studies of auditory perception and auditory physiology.
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.