Back

Analysis of the influence of gradual changes in matrix sentence similarity on neural envelope tracking

Habersetzer, T.; Meyer, B. T.; Radeloff, A.

2026-09-27 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.09.21.752993 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Neural tracking of speech is a well-established phenomenon in neuroscience. However, for speech signals with a fixed structure, significant correlations between speech envelopes and neurophysiological representations occur even for unheard sentences. We exploit a structured speech-in-noise matrix hearing test (Oldenburger Sentence Test, OLSA) to systematically quantify the relationship between acoustic sentence similarity and neural tracking. Simultaneous magnetoencephalography (MEG) and 76-channel electroencephalography (EEG) data, including 16 channels positioned directly around the ears (ear-EEG), were recorded from 21 young adults with normal hearing during the presentation of clean-speech audiobooks and OLSA sentences at six signal-to-noise ratios. A linear decoder trained on audiobooks reconstructed OLSA sentence envelopes. Reconstruction accuracies were compared using a linear mixed model across heard (matched) and unheard (mismatched) sentences of varying acoustic similarity. Significant reconstruction accuracies were achieved across MEG, EEG, and ear-EEG for both matched and mismatched sentences. For mismatched sentences, these accuracies gradually increased with their acoustic similarity to the heard speech data. The high similarity between sentences, which is especially prominent in matrix tests, can cause significant spurious tracking for mismatched stimuli. This effect can reach levels comparable to those of matched sentences and can be mistaken for true neural tracking. Robust neural tracking across modalities further supported the established viability of ear-EEG compared to whole-head systems.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.