Entracking neurons respond best to low-frequency tail tones rather than their characteristic frequency.

Evidence

Interestingly, the detection threshold of an amplitude-modulated tone depends on its level, but such dependence is not found with noise. This can be understood when the excitation pattern of the tone on the basilar membrane is investigated in the cases of amplitude and frequency modulation. Schematic diagrams of these cases are shown in Figure 10.14. In the case of amplitude modulation, the shape of the excitation pattern depends on the level such that at maximum levels of the signal a much broader frequency range is covered than with the lowest levels. This implies that when the level is modulated, the frequency range is also modulated, which provides an additional cue to detect the modulation. The frequency coverage is, on the other hand, constant in the case of frequency-modulated tones, and such an additional cue is not available. — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1164 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

Related

• Entracking neurons respond to amplitude modulation with rate scaling linearly with modulation frequency (similarity 0.88)
• Entracking emerges through multiple stages of convergent auditory inputs (similarity 0.84)
• Brainstem entracking produces horizontal ‘butte’ rate-place profiles encoding pitch (similarity 0.83)
• Entracking codes pitch through constant firing rate while spike phase stays irrelevant (similarity 0.83)
• AM tones change perceived frequency spread, giving extra detection cues that noise lacks. (similarity 0.83)
• Entracking codes low-frequency pitch through uniform firing across neurons while high-frequency firing varies (similarity 0.83)
• Entracking firing rate rises linearly with tone frequency up to roughly 500 Hz (similarity 0.82)
• Cochlear nucleus neurons need wide bandwidths and multi-stage convergence to entrack pitch (similarity 0.82)
• Pitch can be coded by neuron firing rate matching the repetition frequency (similarity 0.82)
• Only two classical theories, place and temporal, explain pitch tracking. (similarity 0.81)
• Entracking generates horizontally flattened rate profiles that encode pitch as firing rate (similarity 0.81)
• Phase invariance of pitch might arise from some neurons always entracking (similarity 0.81)
• Zwicker tones produce no correlate in cochlear mechanical activity (similarity 0.81)
• The temporal code mainly handles pitch at low frequencies where pitch is strong (similarity 0.81)
• The place code alone explains pure-tone pitch above 4-5 kHz. (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Phase invariance of pitch might arise from some neurons always entracking #corroborates (0.85)
• Amplitude-modulated tones gain an extra detection cue that noise and FM tones lack #corroborates (0.80) — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1164
• Cochlear nucleus neurons need wide bandwidths and multi-stage convergence to entrack pitch #expands (0.80)
• Brainstem entracking produces horizontal ‘butte’ rate-place profiles encoding pitch #corroborates (0.80)
• Low-frequency sound triggers larger cochlear responses than comparable higher frequencies. #corroborates (0.75) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3704