Literature DB >> 23333260

Detection of acoustic temporal fine structure by cochlear implant listeners: behavioral results and computational modeling.

Nikita S Imennov1, Jong Ho Won, Ward R Drennan, Elyse Jameyson, Jay T Rubinstein.   

Abstract

A test of within-channel detection of acoustic temporal fine structure (aTFS) cues is presented. Eight cochlear implant listeners (CI) were asked to discriminate between two Schroeder-phase (SP) complexes using a two-alternative, forced-choice task. Because differences between the acoustic stimuli are primarily constrained to their aTFS, successful discrimination reflects a combination of the subjects' perception of and the strategy's ability to deliver aTFS cues. Subjects were mapped with single-channel Continuous Interleaved Sampling (CIS) and Simultaneous Analog Stimulation (SAS) strategies. To compare within- and across- channel delivery of aTFS cues, a 16-channel clinical HiRes strategy was also fitted. Throughout testing, SAS consistently outperformed the CIS strategy (p ≤ 0.002). For SP stimuli with F0 = 50 Hz, the highest discrimination scores were achieved with the HiRes encoding, followed by scores with the SAS and the CIS strategies, respectively. At 200 Hz, single-channel SAS performed better than HiRes (p = 0.022), demonstrating that under a more challenging testing condition, discrimination performance with a single-channel analog encoding can exceed that of a 16-channel pulsatile strategy. To better understand the intermediate steps of discrimination, a biophysical model was used to examine the neural discharges evoked by the SP stimuli. Discrimination estimates calculated from simulated neural responses successfully tracked the behavioral performance trends of single-channel CI listeners.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23333260      PMCID: PMC3605703          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2013.01.004

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


  61 in total

1.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception.

Authors:  Zachary M Smith; Bertrand Delgutte; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-03-07       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Predicting auditory tone-in-noise detection performance: the effects of neural variability.

Authors:  Lisa G Huettel; Leslie M Collins
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.538

3.  Discrimination of Schroeder-phase harmonic complexes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jeff K Longnion; Chad Ruffin; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-12-08

4.  A new multineuron spike train metric.

Authors:  Conor Houghton; Kamal Sen
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.026

5.  Better speech recognition with cochlear implants.

Authors:  B S Wilson; C C Finley; D T Lawson; R D Wolford; D K Eddington; W M Rabinowitz
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1991-07-18       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  A common neural code for frequency- and amplitude-modulated sounds.

Authors:  K Saberi; E R Hafter
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1995-04-06       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Morphometry of intracellularly labeled neurons of the auditory nerve: correlations with functional properties.

Authors:  M C Liberman; M E Oliver
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1984-02-20       Impact factor: 3.215

8.  The cochlear nerve in the cat: topography, cochleotopy, and fiber spectrum.

Authors:  A R Arnesen; K K Osen
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1978-04-15       Impact factor: 3.215

9.  The influence of diameter of medullated nerve fibres of cats on the rising and falling phases of the spike and its recovery.

Authors:  A S Paintal
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1966-06       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Frequency discrimination and speech recognition by patients who use the Ineraid and continuous interleaved sampling cochlear-implant signal processors.

Authors:  M F Dorman; L M Smith; M Smith; J L Parkin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  3 in total

1.  Perception of pure tones and iterated rippled noise for normal hearing and cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Richard T Penninger; Wade W Chien; Patpong Jiradejvong; Emily Boeke; Courtney L Carver; Charles J Limb
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2013-03

2.  Spectrotemporal Modulation Detection and Speech Perception by Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Il Joon Moon; Sunhwa Jin; Heesung Park; Jihwan Woo; Yang-Sun Cho; Won-Ho Chung; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Corrective binaural processing for bilateral cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  Christopher A Brown
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.