Literature DB >> 23464025

Rate and onset cues can improve cochlear implant synthetic vowel recognition in noise.

Myles Mc Laughlin1, Richard B Reilly, Fan-Gang Zeng.   

Abstract

Understanding speech-in-noise is difficult for most cochlear implant (CI) users. Speech-in-noise segregation cues are well understood for acoustic hearing but not for electric hearing. This study investigated the effects of stimulation rate and onset delay on synthetic vowel-in-noise recognition in CI subjects. In experiment I, synthetic vowels were presented at 50, 145, or 795 pulse/s and noise at the same three rates, yielding nine combinations. Recognition improved significantly if the noise had a lower rate than the vowel, suggesting that listeners can use temporal gaps in the noise to detect a synthetic vowel. This hypothesis is supported by accurate prediction of synthetic vowel recognition using a temporal integration window model. Using lower rates a similar trend was observed in normal hearing subjects. Experiment II found that for CI subjects, a vowel onset delay improved performance if the noise had a lower or higher rate than the synthetic vowel. These results show that differing rates or onset times can improve synthetic vowel-in-noise recognition, indicating a need to develop speech processing strategies that encode or emphasize these cues.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23464025      PMCID: PMC3606303          DOI: 10.1121/1.4789940

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


  34 in total

1.  Understanding speech in modulated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Peggy B Nelson; Su-Hyun Jin; Arlene Earley Carney; David A Nelson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Temporal pitch in electric hearing.

Authors:  Fan Gang Zeng
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers.

Authors:  Ginger S Stickney; Fan-Gang Zeng; Ruth Litovsky; Peter Assmann
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: vowels with different fundamental frequencies.

Authors:  P F Assmann; Q Summerfield
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Coding strategies for multichannel cochlear prostheses.

Authors:  B S Wilson; D T Lawson; C C Finley; R D Wolford
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1991

6.  Auditory filter shapes derived with noise stimuli.

Authors:  R D Patterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1976-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The shape of the ear's temporal window.

Authors:  B C Moore; B R Glasberg; C J Plack; A K Biswas
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Phase-locked response to low-frequency tones in single auditory nerve fibers of the squirrel monkey.

Authors:  J E Rose; J F Brugge; D J Anderson; J E Hind
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1967-07       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Auditory nerve fiber responses to electric stimulation: modulated and unmodulated pulse trains.

Authors:  L Litvak; B Delgutte; D Eddington
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Stephen Rebscher; William Harrison; Xiaoan Sun; Haihong Feng
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2008-11-05
View more
  1 in total

1.  Effect of Dual-Carrier Processing on the Intelligibility of Concurrent Vocoded Sentences.

Authors:  Frédéric Apoux; Brittney L Carter; Eric W Healy
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 2.297

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.