Literature DB >> 23464031

Comparison of two channel selection criteria for noise suppression in cochlear implants.

Oldooz Hazrati1, Philipos C Loizou.   

Abstract

The performance of current channel selection criteria used in cochlear implant (CI) devices (e.g., maximum selection criterion used in ACE) degrades significantly in the presence of noise. In noisy backgrounds, coding strategies that select the "right" channels for stimulation could potentially produce substantial improvements in intelligibility. In this study, the performance of two alternative channel selection criteria is assessed in terms of intelligibility and subjective quality with CI users in noise. The performance is compared against that of the maximum selection scheme employed in the ACE strategy (comparison is also made with the CIS strategy). Sentences were presented to seven CI users in speech weighted noise (-5, 0, and 5 dB SNR). Both channel selection criteria were implemented under ideal conditions where a priori knowledge of the target and masker was assumed. This was done to assess the full potential benefit of selecting the "right" channels for stimulation in noisy backgrounds. Substantial intelligibility improvement relative to the CI users' daily strategy (i.e., ACE or CIS) was achieved with the two different channel selection criteria under all noisy conditions considered. No significant difference in subjective quality of noisy speech processed by the two channel selection criteria was observed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23464031      PMCID: PMC3606270          DOI: 10.1121/1.4788999

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


  15 in total

1.  Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system.

Authors:  A E Vandali; L A Whitford; K L Plant; G M Clark
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants.

Authors:  L M Friesen; R V Shannon; D Baskent; X Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies and noise reduction algorithms.

Authors:  King Chung
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2004

Review 4.  Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants.

Authors:  Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  Adv Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2006

5.  Use of a sigmoidal-shaped function for noise attenuation in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Yi Hu; Philipos C Loizou; Ning Li; Kalyan Kasturi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Factors influencing intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech: implications for noise reduction.

Authors:  Ning Li; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Role of mask pattern in intelligibility of ideal binary-masked noisy speech.

Authors:  Ulrik Kjems; Jesper B Boldt; Michael S Pedersen; Thomas Lunner; Deliang Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  A channel-selection criterion for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Kostas Kokkinakis; Oldooz Hazrati; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Clinical evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio-based noise reduction in Nucleus® cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Pam W Dawson; Stefan J Mauger; Adam A Hersbach
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  A new sound coding strategy for suppressing noise in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Yi Hu; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  1 in total

1.  The effects of Lombard perturbation on speech intelligibility in noise for normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Juliana N Saba; John H L Hansen
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 2.482

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.