ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023
A minimal physics-based model for musical perception.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effects of Music on Inflammation: A Bibliometric Study from 1989 to 2024.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- Flexoelectricity and the fluctuations of (active) living cells: Implications for energy harvesting, ion transport, and neuronal activity.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Potential common targets of music therapy intervention in neuropsychiatric disorders: the prefrontal cortex-hippocampus -amygdala circuit (a review).Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
- The giant flexoelectric effect in a luffa plant-based sponge for green devices and energy harvesters.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Some people, entirely untrained in music, can listen to a song and replicate it on a piano with unnerving accuracy. What enables some to "hear" music so much better than others? Long-standing research confirms that part of the answer is undoubtedly neurological and can be improved with training. However, are there structural, physical, or engineering attributes of the human hearing mechanism apparatus (i.e., the hair cells of the internal ear) that render one human innately superior to another in terms of propensity to listen to music? In this work, we investigate a physics-based model of the electromechanics of the hair cells in the inner ear to understand why a person might be physiologically better poised to distinguish musical sounds. A key feature of the model is that we avoid a "black-box" systems-type approach. All parameters are well-defined physical quantities, including membrane thickness, bending modulus, electromechanical properties, and geometrical features, among others. Using the two-tone interference problem as a proxy for musical perception, our model allows us to establish the basis for exploring the effect of external factors such as medicine or environment. As an example of the insights we obtain, we conclude that the reduction in bending modulus of the cell membranes (which for instance may be caused by the usage of a certain class of analgesic drugs) or an increase in the flexoelectricity of the hair cell membrane can interfere with the perception of two-tone excitation.
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.