Does temporal organization matter?

Same injected values. Same duration. Different order. This manipulates the input to the original frozen simulation; it is not a new spoken performance or a physiologically calibrated hearing model.

We reorder 200 ms blocks from the synthetic poem’s provisional displacement receiver. Every stimulation value is preserved, including zeros and capped values. A separate constant-input control preserves only average strength and duration.

Pilot finding: Changing only block order changes the timing of direct downstream activity reproducibly across seeds. Most of that difference follows the relocated input: the stronger test of an identical block in a different preceding context gives weak downstream evidence. No stable descending-neuron disposition is established.

What would count as a difference?

A changed timeline alone is expected when the input moves. The context comparison puts the response blocks back into their original order, then asks whether the same block produced different activity. Ordinary neural lag and recurrent state can cause this; it is not evidence of understanding or learned memory.

Four seeds describe simulator variability, not four biological flies. Shaded ranges are not confidence intervals. The signal/error ratio is descriptive, not a significance test. Positive leave-one-seed-out similarity indicates that a difference pattern resembles the pattern in the other three runs; zero or negative values do not support a repeating pattern.

Protocol · Findings · Response JSON · Injected values and permutation