This document outlines a study called the Music Single-Domain Task Battery (Music-SDTB) that aims to investigate the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying temporal predictions. The study will test 25 participants using 6 tasks that manipulate timing and sensory domains to probe the contributions of the basal ganglia and cerebellum in forming temporal predictions in rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences. Key hypotheses are that the basal ganglia contributes more to rhythmic timing judgments while the cerebellum contributes more to single interval timing judgments. Results will provide insights into the role of different brain regions and sensory modalities in temporal prediction.

1. Music Single-Domain Task Battery (Music-SDTB)
Probing the Neurocognitive Mechanisms of Temporal Predictions
Ana Luísa Pinho
24th
of October 2022
Diedrichsenlab meeting

2. Motivation of the project
Anticipation of the timing of future events based on the temporal regularities of past events
What does temporal predictions stand for?
What are temporal predictions important for?
Key to attentional-orienting processes
What is the goal?
Verify the context-specific, neurocognitive-mechanism hypothesis with neuroimaging

3. Formation of Temporal Predictions
1 (Quasi)-periodic stimulus stream
2 Aperiodic stimulus stream
Ex: speech, music or biological motion
Ex: single interval of two consecutive events
Categories Models
1 Single-interval prediction
2 Periodic + Single-interval prediction

4. Formation of Temporal Predictions
1 (Quasi)-periodic stimulus stream
2 Aperiodic stimulus stream
Ex: speech, music or biological motion
Ex: single interval of two consecutive events
Categories Models
1 Single-interval prediction
Context-dependent
2 Periodic + Single-interval prediction

5. Formation of Temporal Predictions
1 (Quasi)-periodic stimulus stream
2 Aperiodic stimulus stream
Ex: speech, music or biological motion
Ex: single interval of two consecutive events
Categories Models
1 Single-interval prediction
Context-dependent
2 Periodic + Single-interval prediction
Subserved by two subcortical networks

6. Testing Model 2: a neuropsychological study
Breska, A and Ivry, RB (2018) - Double dissociation of single-interval and rhythmic
temporal prediction in cerebellar degeneration and Parkinson’s disease, PNAS
● Timing task with overt responses
● Clinical population: Parkinson’s disease + Cerebellar degeneration patients
● Basal Ganglia rhythmic judgments
● Cerebellum single-interval judgments

7. ● Identify the contributions of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum to form temporal
predictions in the context of rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences of events
Music-SDTB: outline

8. ● Identify the contributions of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum to form temporal
predictions in the context of rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences of events
● Use different sensory modalities —audio and visual— to characterize the
relationship of these sub-cortical contributions with the cortex
Music-SDTB: outline

9. ● Identify the contributions of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum to form temporal
predictions in the context of rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences of events
● Use different sensory modalities —audio and visual— to characterize the
relationship of these sub-cortical contributions with the cortex
Music-SDTB: outline
• 25 participants with no clinical profile
• 6 tasks modulating timing and sensory domains
• Timing: Production, Perception, NTFD
• Sensory: Auditory and Visual
• 2 main conditions for every task
• Beat condition
• Interval condition

10. ● Identify the contributions of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum to form temporal
predictions in the context of rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences of events
● Use different sensory modalities —audio and visual— to characterize the
relationship of these sub-cortical contributions with the cortex
Music-SDTB: outline
• 25 participants with no clinical profile
• 6 tasks modulating timing and sensory domains
• Timing: Production, Perception, NTFD
• Sensory: Auditory and Visual
• 2 main conditions for every task
• Beat condition
• Interval condition
Behavior

11. ● Identify the contributions of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum to form temporal
predictions in the context of rhythmic and non-rhythmic sequences of events
● Use different sensory modalities —audio and visual— to characterize the
relationship of these sub-cortical contributions with the cortex
Music-SDTB: outline
• 25 participants with no clinical profile
• 6 tasks modulating timing and sensory domains
• Timing: Production, Perception, NTFD
• Sensory: Auditory and Visual
• 2 main conditions for every task
• Beat condition
• Interval condition
Behavior
fMRI

12. Music SDTB: a deep behavioral-phenotyping study

13. Music SDTB: tasks and hypotheses
Production Perception NTFD*
*NTFD = Non-Temporal Feature Discrimination
Basal Ganglia Cerebellum

14. Music SDTB: tasks and hypotheses
Production Perception NTFD*
*NTFD = Non-Temporal Feature Discrimination
H1
Basal Ganglia Cerebellum

15. Music SDTB: tasks and hypotheses
Production Perception NTFD*
*NTFD = Non-Temporal Feature Discrimination
H2
Basal Ganglia Cerebellum

16. Music SDTB: tasks and hypotheses
Production Perception NTFD*
*NTFD = Non-Temporal Feature Discrimination
H3
Basal Ganglia Cerebellum

17. Music SDTB: Production tasks
Beat
Interval
Standard∈{459,510 ,561,612,663}
...
Baseline
...
Baseline
ISI I⊂[min(3×∀ Standard),max (3×∀ Standard)]
ISIB=3(Standard)
Standard ISIB Standard ISIB
Standard ISII Standard ISII
= 80ms
or

18. Music SDTB: Perception tasks
Beat
Interval
...
Baseline
Standard ISIB Standard ISIB Comparison
Standard∈{459,510 ,561,612,663}
ISI I⊂[min(3×∀ Standard),max (3×∀ Standard)]
Comparison=Standard (1+d)
ISIB=3(Standard)
Standard ISII Standard ISII Comparison
...
Baseline
ISIB > or <
Comparison?
ISIB > or <
Comparison?
= 80ms
or

19. Beat
Interval
= 80ms
or
Music SDTB: NTFD tasks
Standard ISIB Standard ISIB Standard
Standard ISII Standard ISII Standard
Higher or Lower?
Circle or Triangle?
Higher or Lower?
Circle or Triangle?
Standard∈{459,510 ,561,612,663}
ISI I⊂[min(3×∀ Standard),max (3×∀ Standard)]
ISIB=3(Standard)
...
Baseline
...
Baseline

20. Behavioral Results
● 25 Participants
● 3 Sessions
➔ 1st
Session: 24 runs (4 runs per task)
➔ 2nd
and 3rd
Sessions: 28 runs (4 runs for Production + NTFD and 6 runs for Perception)

21. Behavioral Results
● 25 Participants
● 3 Sessions
➔ 1st
Session: 24 runs (4 runs per task)
➔ 2nd
and 3rd
Sessions: 28 runs (4 runs for Production + NTFD and 6 runs for Perception)
● Validate the tasks
● Assess complexity: between Conditions and Modalities
● Preliminary validation of our hypothesis

23. Condition:
Modality:
Benefit of Audio over Visual

24. SA=
Response−Standard
Standard
AA=|Response−Standard
Standard |
Condition: Validates H1 and H3
Modality: AA shows benefit of Audio over Visual

25. PSE indexes bias
Psychometric Function to dissociate
bias from variability from our
measurements of performance
DL indexes variability
PSE: bias shorter for longer Standards

26. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA
Perception Tasks

27. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA
● No effect of DL for Conditions
but for Standard = 612
Perception Tasks

28. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA
● Significant effect of DL for Modality
● No effect of DL for Conditions
but for Standard = 612
Perception Tasks

29. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA
● Significant effect of DL for Modality
● Interaction between Visual
Modality and Conditions
● No effect of DL for Conditions
but for Standard = 612
Perception Tasks

30. Benefit of Visual over Audio
Aligns w/ results of SA for Production Tasks
Modality:

31. Condition:

32. twitter.com/ALuisaPinho agrilopi@uwo.ca
Thank you! Scenes of the next episode: