Literature DB >> 18249077

Spectral and temporal cues for speech recognition: implications for auditory prostheses.

Li Xu1, Bryan E Pfingst.   

Abstract

Features of stimulation important for speech recognition in people with normal hearing and in people using implanted auditory prostheses include spectral information represented by place of stimulation along the tonotopic axis and temporal information represented in low-frequency envelopes of the signal. The relative contributions of these features to speech recognition and their interactions have been studied using vocoder-like simulations of cochlear implant speech processors presented to listeners with normal hearing. In these studies, spectral/place information was manipulated by varying the number of channels and the temporal-envelope information was manipulated by varying the lowpass cutoffs of the envelope extractors. Consonant and vowel recognition in quiet reached plateau at 8 and 12 channels and lowpass cutoff frequencies of 16 Hz and 4 Hz, respectively. Phoneme (especially vowel) recognition in noise required larger numbers of channels. Lexical tone recognition required larger numbers of channels and higher lowpass cutoff frequencies. There was a tradeoff between spectral/place and temporal-envelope requirements. Most current auditory prostheses seem to deliver adequate temporal-envelope information, but the number of effective channels is suboptimal, particularly for speech recognition in noise, lexical tone recognition, and music perception.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18249077      PMCID: PMC2610393          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2007.12.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  73 in total

1.  Ability of nucleus cochlear implantees to recognize music.

Authors:  S Fujita; J Ito
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 1.547

2.  Features of stimulation affecting tonal-speech perception: implications for cochlear prostheses.

Authors:  Li Xu; Yuhjung Tsai; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  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

4.  Temporal and spectral cues in Mandarin tone recognition.

Authors:  Ying-Yee Kong; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Mandarin tone recognition in cochlear-implant subjects.

Authors:  Chao-Gang Wei; Keli Cao; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation.

Authors:  J T Rubinstein; B S Wilson; C C Finley; P J Abbas
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  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

8.  Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception.

Authors:  R Drullman; J M Festen; R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-05       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.  Enhancing temporal cues to voice pitch in continuous interleaved sampling cochlear implants.

Authors:  Tim Green; Andrew Faulkner; Stuart Rosen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  43 in total

Review 1.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Relative contributions of temporal envelope and fine structure cues to lexical tone recognition in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Shuo Wang; Li Xu; Robert Mannell
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-08-11

5.  Comparing the information conveyed by envelope modulation for speech intelligibility, speech quality, and music quality.

Authors:  James M Kates; Kathryn H Arehart
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Acoustic properties of vowel production in prelingually deafened Mandarin-speaking children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Jing Yang; Emily Brown; Robert A Fox; Li Xu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Concurrent-vowel and tone recognitions in acoustic and simulated electric hearing.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Objective speech intelligibility measurement for cochlear implant users in complex listening environments.

Authors:  João F Santos; Stefano Cosentino; Oldooz Hazrati; Philipos C Loizou; Tiago H Falk
Journal:  Speech Commun       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 2.017

9.  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

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.