{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03385049365303244, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021156558533145273, 'mean_word_length': 5.251101321585903, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How fast can music and speech be perceived? Key identification in time-compressed music with periodic insertions of silence

This study builds upon recent work that indicates the overlap of neural resources in the processing of music and speech (Federenko, Patel, Casasanto, Winawer, & Gibson, 2009; Koelsch, Gunter, Wittfoth, & Sammler, 2005; Kraus & Chandrasekaran, 2010; Patel, 2008). It is based on an experimental design used by Ghitza and Greenberg (2009) in an experiment that explored the possible role of brain rhythms in speech perception by inserting silences in compressed speech and ascertaining the error rate at identifying words. They used semantically unpredictable (nonsensical) but grammatical sentences that were compressed to three times the speed of normal speech. Without silences added, the error rate for word identification was >50%. However, when silences (up to 160 ms) were added between every 40 ms segment of audio, performance improved, resulting in a U-shaped error rate curve with a preferred packaging rate of around 6 to 17 Hz. Packaging rate is defined as the periodic silence-plus-audio-segment rate. Ghitza and Greenberg interpreted the decrease in error rate corresponding to the insertions of silence as essentially the result of adding “necessary” decoding time. Based on these results, they implicated an oscillatory mechanism on a specific timescale for auditory processing.