Literature DB >> 15957791

Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition.

Li Xu1, Catherine S Thompson, Bryan E Pfingst.   

Abstract

Cochlear implants provide users with limited spectral and temporal information. In this study, the amount of spectral and temporal information was systematically varied through simulations of cochlear implant processors using a noise-excited vocoder. Spectral information was controlled by varying the number of channels between 1 and 16, and temporal information was controlled by varying the lowpass cutoff frequencies of the envelope extractors from 1 to 512 Hz. Consonants and vowels processed using those conditions were presented to seven normal-hearing native-English-speaking listeners for identification. The results demonstrated that both spectral and temporal cues were important for consonant and vowel recognition with the spectral cues having a greater effect than the temporal cues for the ranges of numbers of channels and lowpass cutoff frequencies tested. The lowpass cutoff for asymptotic performance in consonant and vowel recognition was 16 and 4 Hz, respectively. The number of channels at which performance plateaued for consonants and vowels was 8 and 12, respectively. Within the above-mentioned ranges of lowpass cutoff frequency and number of channels, the temporal and spectral cues showed a tradeoff for phoneme recognition. Information transfer analyses showed different relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues in the perception of various phonetic/acoustic features.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15957791      PMCID: PMC1414641          DOI: 10.1121/1.1886405

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


  50 in total

1.  Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs.

Authors:  M F Dorman; P C Loizou; D Rainey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A cochlear frequency-position function for several species--29 years later.

Authors:  D D Greenwood
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effects of spectral smearing on phoneme and word recognition.

Authors:  A Boothroyd; B Mulhearn; J Gong; J Ostroff
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing.

Authors:  Q J Fu; R V Shannon; X Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor.

Authors:  K E Fishman; R V Shannon; W H Slattery
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Identification of speech by cochlear implant recipients with the Multipeak (MPEAK) and Spectral Peak (SPEAK) speech coding strategies. I. Vowels.

Authors:  M W Skinner; M S Fourakis; T A Holden; L K Holden; M E Demorest
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Speech recognition at simulated soft, conversational, and raised-to-loud vocal efforts by adults with cochlear implants.

Authors:  M W Skinner; L K Holden; T A Holden; M E Demorest; M S Fourakis
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The recognition of vowels differing by a single formant by cochlear-implant subjects.

Authors:  R S Tyler; N Tye-Murray; S R Otto
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Temporal representations with cochlear implants.

Authors:  B S Wilson; C C Finley; D T Lawson; M Zerbi
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1997-11

10.  The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels.

Authors:  M F Dorman; P C Loizou; J Fitzke; Z Tu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  92 in total

1.  The relative phonetic contributions of a cochlear implant and residual acoustic hearing to bimodal speech perception.

Authors:  Benjamin M Sheffield; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Psychoacoustic performance and music and speech perception in prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Kyu Hwan Jung; Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Elyse Jameyson; Gary Miyasaki; Susan J Norton; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2012-03-03       Impact factor: 1.854

3.  Different timescales for the neural coding of consonant and vowel sounds.

Authors:  Claudia A Perez; Crystal T Engineer; Vikram Jakkamsetti; Ryan S Carraway; Matthew S Perry; Michael P Kilgard
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 5.357

4.  Effect of stimulation rate on cochlear implant users' phoneme, word and sentence recognition in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  Robert V Shannon; Rachel J Cruz; John J Galvin
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 1.854

5.  The effects of frequency-place shift on consonant confusion in cochlear implant simulations.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Li Xu; Chao-Yang Lee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The intelligibility of noise-vocoded speech: spectral information available from across-channel comparison of amplitude envelopes.

Authors:  Brian Roberts; Robert J Summers; Peter J Bailey
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Performance variability on perceptual discrimination tasks in profoundly deaf adults with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Marcia J Hay-McCutcheon; Nathaniel R Peterson; David B Pisoni; Karen Iler Kirk; Xin Yang; Jason Parton
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 2.288

8.  Effects of Expanding Envelope Fluctuations on Consonant Perception in Hearing-Impaired Listeners.

Authors:  Alan Wiinberg; Johannes Zaar; Torsten Dau
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

9.  Vowel discrimination by hearing infants as a function of number of spectral channels.

Authors:  Andrea D Warner-Czyz; Derek M Houston; Linda S Hynan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Age-Related Differences in the Processing of Temporal Envelope and Spectral Cues in a Speech Segment.

Authors:  Matthew J Goupell; Casey R Gaskins; Maureen J Shader; Erin P Walter; Samira Anderson; Sandra Gordon-Salant
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.