Early electrophysiological indicators for predictive processing in audition: A review

Active Inference: A Process Theory

“…The result is shown in the right panel as a negative difference waveform that peaks at around 80 ms (or 180 ms allowing 100 ms conduction delays to occipital cortex). This is exactly the form of difference elicited in empirical oddball studies using sequences of repeating stimuli, where it is known as the mismatch negativity (Bendixen et al, 2012). Figure 6; however, here we compare two (oddball and standard) trials that are indicated by the arrows on the insert from Figure 4 (upper right).…”

“…It illustrates a number of phenomena that are ubiquitous in empirical studies. These include repetition suppression (de Gardelle, Waszczuk, Egner, & Summerfield, 2013), violation and omission responses (Bendixen, SanMiguel, & Schroger, 2012), and neuronal responses that are characteristic of the hippocampus, namely, place cell activity (Moser, Rowland, & Moser, 2015), theta-gamma coupling, theta sequences and phase precession (Burgess, Barry, & O'Keefe, 2007;Lisman & Redish, 2009). We also touch on dynamics seen in parietal and prefrontal cortex, such as evidence accumulation and race-to-bound or threshold (Huk & Shadlen, 2005, Gold & Shadlen, 2007Hunt et al, 2012;Solway & Botvinick, 2012;de Lafuente, Jazayeri, & Shadlen, 2015;FitzGerald, Moran, Friston, & Dolan, 2015;Latimer, Yates, Meister, Huk, & Pillow, 2015).…”

Brain responses in humans reveal ideal observer-like sensitivity to complex acoustic patterns

“…Most previous work on sensitivity to acoustic patterning has been conducted in the context of the MMN paradigm where the occurrence of a mismatch response to a signal that violates a previously established regularity is taken as a (indirect) measure of the extent to which this regularity has been acquired (10,11,16,30). …”

“…The ability to discover regularities within the sensory input is therefore a critical aspect of scene analysis: providing the anchor that enables an observer to identify and track a behaviorally relevant signal from within the brouhaha of a busy scene. Detecting temporally recurrent auditory features enables listeners to recognize auditory objects (because most auditory signals only have meaning as patterns over time), but also to form rules, or models, that characterize the past and expected behavior of objects within the environment (4,16). Indeed, experimental work demonstrates that regularities within an ongoing stimulus are exploited to tune the system to the statistics of the current sensory input by optimizing behavior (17), facilitating source segregation (10), and enabling rapid detection of changes in one's surroundings (18).…”

Multistability in auditory stream segregation: a predictive coding view

“…'the next sound is higher than the current sound'). Evidence from numerous electrophysiological studies (for review, see Bendixen et al [27]) suggests that these types of predictive relations can be extracted from sound sequences outside the focus of attention and that the extracted information is turned into predictions about forthcoming stimuli. For instance, Bendixen et al [28] compared the processing of sound omissions in three different cases: (i) the auditory features of the omitted sound could be predicted based on the preceding sounds, (ii) sound features could be determined only from the sound following the omitted one, and (iii) sound features could neither be predicted before nor determined after the omission.…”