Literature DB >> 11144584

Modeling the combined effects of basilar membrane nonlinearity and roughness on stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission fine structure.

C L Talmadge1, A Tubis, G R Long, C Tong.   

Abstract

A theoretical framework for describing the effects of nonlinear reflection on otoacoustic emission fine structure is presented. The following models of cochlear reflection are analyzed: weak nonlinearity, distributed roughness, and a combination of weak nonlinearity and distributed roughness. In particular, these models are examined in the context of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs). In agreement with previous studies, it is concluded that only linear cochlear reflection can explain the underlying properties of cochlear fine structures. However, it is shown that nonlinearity can unexpectedly, in some cases, significantly modify the level and phase behaviors of the otoacoustic emission fine structure, and actually enhance the pattern of fine structures observed. The implications of these results on the stimulus level dependence of SFOAE fine structure are also explored.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11144584     DOI: 10.1121/1.1321012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  30 in total

1.  Coherent reflection without traveling waves: on the origin of long-latency otoacoustic emissions in lizards.

Authors:  Christopher Bergevin; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  Do forward- and backward-traveling waves occur within the cochlea? Countering the critique of Nobili et al.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; Arnold Tubis; Carrick L Talmadge
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-12

3.  Use of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission latency and level to investigate cochlear mechanics in human ears.

Authors:  Kim S Schairer; John C Ellison; Denis Fitzpatrick; Douglas H Keefe
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Measurement of the distribution of medial olivocochlear acoustic reflex strengths across normal-hearing individuals via otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Bradford C Backus; John J Guinan
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-10-12

5.  Testing coherent reflection in chinchilla: Auditory-nerve responses predict stimulus-frequency emissions.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; Arnold Tubis; Carrick L Talmadge
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in humans: comparison to behavioral tuning.

Authors:  Karolina K Charaziak; Pamela Souza; Jonathan H Siegel
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2013-09-07

7.  Obtaining reliable phase-gradient delays from otoacoustic emission data.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; Christopher Bergevin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  High frequency transient-evoked otoacoustic emission measurements using chirp and click stimuli.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; M Patrick Feeney; Lisa L Hunter; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Chelsea M Blankenship; Angela C Garinis; Daniel B Putterman; Marcin Wróblewski
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Distortion products and backward-traveling waves in nonlinear active models of the cochlea.

Authors:  Renata Sisto; Arturo Moleti; Teresa Botti; Daniele Bertaccini; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Two-tone suppression of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; John C Ellison; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.