Literature DB >> 21104288

Isoresponse versus isoinput estimates of cochlear filter tuning.

Almudena Eustaquio-Martín1, Enrique A Lopez-Poveda.   

Abstract

The tuning of a linear filter may be inferred from the filter's isoresponse (e.g., tuning curves) or isoinput (e.g., isolevel curves) characteristics. This paper provides a theoretical demonstration that for nonlinear filters with compressive response characteristics like those of the basilar membrane, isoresponse measures can suggest strikingly sharper tuning than isoinput measures. The practical significance of this phenomenon is demonstrated by inferring the 3-dB-down bandwidths (BW(3dB)) of human auditory filters at 500 and 4,000 Hz from behavioral isoresponse and isoinput measures obtained with sinusoidal and notched noise forward maskers. Inferred cochlear responses were compressive for the two types of maskers. Consistent with expectations, low-level BW(3dB) estimates obtained from isoresponse conditions were considerably narrower than those obtained from isolevel conditions: 69 vs. 174 Hz, respectively, at 500 Hz, and 280 vs. 464 Hz, respectively, at 4,000 Hz. Furthermore, isoresponse BW(3dB) decreased with increasing level while corresponding isolevel estimates remained approximately constant at 500 Hz or increased slightly at 4 kHz. It is suggested that comparisons between isoresponse supra-threshold human tuning and threshold animal neural tuning should be made with caution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21104288      PMCID: PMC3085686          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-010-0252-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  42 in total

1.  Frequency selectivity as a function of level and frequency measured with uniformly exciting notched noise.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Quantifying the implications of nonlinear cochlear tuning for auditory-filter estimates.

Authors:  Michael G Heinz; H Steven Colburn; Laurel H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea.

Authors:  L Robles; M A Ruggero
Journal:  Physiol Rev       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 37.312

4.  Cochlear nonlinearity between 500 and 8000 Hz in listeners with normal hearing.

Authors:  Enrique A Lopez-Poveda; Christopher J Plack; Ray Meddis
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Psychophysical evidence for auditory compression at low characteristic frequencies.

Authors:  Christopher J Plack; Vit Drga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The effects of a high-frequency suppressor on tuning curves and derived basilar-membrane response functions.

Authors:  Ifat Yasin; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Otoacoustic estimation of cochlear tuning: validation in the chinchilla.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-05-04

8.  A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  D A Nelson; A C Schroder; M Wojtczak
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Behavioural measurement of level-dependent shifts in the vibration pattern on the basilar membrane at 1 and 2 kHz.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Brian R Glasberg
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  19 in total

1.  Functional modeling of the human auditory brainstem response to broadband stimulation.

Authors:  Sarah Verhulst; Hari M Bharadwaj; Golbarg Mehraei; Christopher A Shera; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  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

3.  Evaluating the effects of olivocochlear feedback on psychophysical measures of frequency selectivity.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Frequency selectivity in Old-World monkeys corroborates sharp cochlear tuning in humans.

Authors:  Philip X Joris; Christopher Bergevin; Radha Kalluri; Myles Mc Laughlin; Pascal Michelet; Marcel van der Heijden; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Comparative Auditory Neuroscience: Understanding the Evolution and Function of Ears.

Authors:  Geoffrey A Manley
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2016-08-18

6.  Frequency selectivity in macaque monkeys measured using a notched-noise method.

Authors:  Jane A Burton; Margit E Dylla; Ramnarayan Ramachandran
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Salient features of otoacoustic emissions are common across tetrapod groups and suggest shared properties of generation mechanisms.

Authors:  Christopher Bergevin; Geoffrey A Manley; Christine Köppl
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Auditory filter tuning inferred with short sinusoidal and notched-noise maskers.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Processing pitch in a nonhuman mammal (Chinchilla laniger).

Authors:  William P Shofner; Megan Chaney
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 2.231

10.  On the controversy about the sharpness of human cochlear tuning.

Authors:  Enrique A Lopez-Poveda; Almudena Eustaquio-Martin
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2013-05-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.