IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1006162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Detecting change in stochastic sound sequences

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Skerritt-Davis
  • Mounya Elhilali

Abstract

Our ability to parse our acoustic environment relies on the brain’s capacity to extract statistical regularities from surrounding sounds. Previous work in regularity extraction has predominantly focused on the brain’s sensitivity to predictable patterns in sound sequences. However, natural sound environments are rarely completely predictable, often containing some level of randomness, yet the brain is able to effectively interpret its surroundings by extracting useful information from stochastic sounds. It has been previously shown that the brain is sensitive to the marginal lower-order statistics of sound sequences (i.e., mean and variance). In this work, we investigate the brain’s sensitivity to higher-order statistics describing temporal dependencies between sound events through a series of change detection experiments, where listeners are asked to detect changes in randomness in the pitch of tone sequences. Behavioral data indicate listeners collect statistical estimates to process incoming sounds, and a perceptual model based on Bayesian inference shows a capacity in the brain to track higher-order statistics. Further analysis of individual subjects’ behavior indicates an important role of perceptual constraints in listeners’ ability to track these sensory statistics with high fidelity. In addition, the inference model facilitates analysis of neural electroencephalography (EEG) responses, anchoring the analysis relative to the statistics of each stochastic stimulus. This reveals both a deviance response and a change-related disruption in phase of the stimulus-locked response that follow the higher-order statistics. These results shed light on the brain’s ability to process stochastic sound sequences.Author summary: To understand our auditory surroundings, the brain extracts invariant representations from sounds over time that are robust to the randomness inherent in real-world sound sources, while staying flexible to adapt to a dynamic environment. The computational mechanisms used to achieve this in auditory perception are not well understood. Typically, this ability is investigated using predictable patterns in a sequence of sounds, asking: “How does the brain detect the pattern embedded in this sequence?”, which does not generalize well to natural listening. Here, we examine processing of stochastic sounds that contain uncertainty in their interpretation, asking: “How does the brain detect the statistical structure instantiated by this sequence?”. We present human experimental evidence employing a perceptual model for predictive processing to show that the brain collects higher-order statistics about the temporal dependencies between sounds. In addition, the model reveals correlates between task performance and individual differences in perception, as well as deviance effects in the neural response that would be otherwise hidden with conventional, stimulus-driven analyses. This model guides our interpretation of both behavioral and neural responses in the presence of stimulus uncertainty, allowing for the study of perception of more natural stimuli in the laboratory.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Skerritt-Davis & Mounya Elhilali, 2018. "Detecting change in stochastic sound sequences," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1006162
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006162
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006162&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert C Wilson & Matthew R Nassar & Joshua I Gold, 2013. "A Mixture of Delta-Rules Approximation to Bayesian Inference in Change-Point Problems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Jean Daunizeau & Hanneke E M den Ouden & Matthias Pessiglione & Stefan J Kiebel & Klaas E Stephan & Karl J Friston, 2010. "Observing the Observer (I): Meta-Bayesian Models of Learning and Decision-Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-10, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter M C Harrison & Roberta Bianco & Maria Chait & Marcus T Pearce, 2020. "PPM-Decay: A computational model of auditory prediction with memory decay," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-41, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Payam Piray & Nathaniel D. Daw, 2021. "A model for learning based on the joint estimation of stochasticity and volatility," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Mel W Khaw & Luminita Stevens & Michael Woodford, 2021. "Individual differences in the perception of probability," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-25, April.
    3. Dimitrije Marković & Jan Gläscher & Peter Bossaerts & John O’Doherty & Stefan J Kiebel, 2015. "Modeling the Evolution of Beliefs Using an Attentional Focus Mechanism," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-34, October.
    4. Benjamin Patrick Evans & Mikhail Prokopenko, 2021. "A maximum entropy model of bounded rational decision-making with prior beliefs and market feedback," Papers 2102.09180, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    5. Andreea O Diaconescu & Christoph Mathys & Lilian A E Weber & Jean Daunizeau & Lars Kasper & Ekaterina I Lomakina & Ernst Fehr & Klaas E Stephan, 2014. "Inferring on the Intentions of Others by Hierarchical Bayesian Learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Falk Lieder & Klaas E Stephan & Jean Daunizeau & Marta I Garrido & Karl J Friston, 2013. "A Neurocomputational Model of the Mismatch Negativity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Florent Meyniel, 2020. "Brain dynamics for confidence-weighted learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-27, June.
    8. Samuel J Gershman & Angela Radulescu & Kenneth A Norman & Yael Niv, 2014. "Statistical Computations Underlying the Dynamics of Memory Updating," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Giovanni Leone & Charlotte Postel & Alison Mary & Florence Fraisse & Thomas Vallée & Fausto Viader & Vincent Sayette & Denis Peschanski & Jaques Dayan & Francis Eustache & Pierre Gagnepain, 2022. "Altered predictive control during memory suppression in PTSD," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    10. Robert C Wilson & Yael Niv, 2015. "Is Model Fitting Necessary for Model-Based fMRI?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Elyse H Norton & Luigi Acerbi & Wei Ji Ma & Michael S Landy, 2019. "Human online adaptation to changes in prior probability," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, July.
    12. Marie Devaine & Jean Daunizeau, 2017. "Learning about and from others' prudence, impatience or laziness: The computational bases of attitude alignment," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-28, March.
    13. Jean Daunizeau & Kerstin Preuschoff & Karl Friston & Klaas Stephan, 2011. "Optimizing Experimental Design for Comparing Models of Brain Function," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Payam Piray & Nathaniel D. Daw, 2024. "Computational processes of simultaneous learning of stochasticity and volatility in humans," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Jean Daunizeau & Hanneke E M den Ouden & Matthias Pessiglione & Stefan J Kiebel & Karl J Friston & Klaas E Stephan, 2010. "Observing the Observer (II): Deciding When to Decide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-19, December.
    16. Marie Devaine & Guillaume Hollard & Jean Daunizeau, 2014. "The Social Bayesian Brain: Does Mentalizing Make a Difference When We Learn?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Fabien Vinckier & Lionel Rigoux & Irma T Kurniawan & Chen Hu & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & Jean Daunizeau & Mathias Pessiglione, 2019. "Sour grapes and sweet victories: How actions shape preferences," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Jean Daunizeau & Vincent Adam & Lionel Rigoux, 2014. "VBA: A Probabilistic Treatment of Nonlinear Models for Neurobiological and Behavioural Data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1006162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.