Literature DB >> 23654388

On the balance of envelope and temporal fine structure in the encoding of speech in the early auditory system.

Shihab Shamma1, Christian Lorenzi.   

Abstract

There is much debate on how the spectrotemporal modulations of speech (or its spectrogram) are encoded in the responses of the auditory nerve, and whether speech intelligibility is best conveyed via the "envelope" (E) or "temporal fine-structure" (TFS) of the neural responses. Wide use of vocoders to resolve this question has commonly assumed that manipulating the amplitude-modulation and frequency-modulation components of the vocoded signal alters the relative importance of E or TFS encoding on the nerve, thus facilitating assessment of their relative importance to intelligibility. Here we argue that this assumption is incorrect, and that the vocoder approach is ineffective in differentially altering the neural E and TFS. In fact, we demonstrate using a simplified model of early auditory processing that both neural E and TFS encode the speech spectrogram with constant and comparable relative effectiveness regardless of the vocoder manipulations. However, we also show that neural TFS cues are less vulnerable than their E counterparts under severe noisy conditions, and hence should play a more prominent role in cochlear stimulation strategies.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23654388      PMCID: PMC3663870          DOI: 10.1121/1.4795783

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


  47 in total

1.  Sensitivities of cells in anteroventral cochlear nucleus of cat to spatiotemporal discharge patterns across primary afferents.

Authors:  L H Carney
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Responses to amplitude-modulated tones in the auditory nerve of the cat.

Authors:  P X Joris; T C Yin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Responses of auditory-nerve fibers to nasal consonant-vowel syllables.

Authors:  L Deng; C D Geisler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The representations of the steady-state vowel sound /e/ in the discharge patterns of cat anteroventral cochlear nucleus neurons.

Authors:  C C Blackburn; M B Sachs
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Effects of interaural time delays of noise stimuli on low-frequency cells in the cat's inferior colliculus. III. Evidence for cross-correlation.

Authors:  T C Yin; J C Chan; L H Carney
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Synchrony suppression in complex stimulus responses of a biophysical model of the cochlea.

Authors:  S A Shamma; K A Morrish
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  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

8.  Enhancement of neural synchronization in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus. I. Responses to tones at the characteristic frequency.

Authors:  P X Joris; L H Carney; P H Smith; T C Yin
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Spatial cross-correlation. A proposed mechanism for acoustic pitch perception.

Authors:  G E Loeb; M W White; M M Merzenich
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.086

10.  Speech processing in the auditory system. I: The representation of speech sounds in the responses of the auditory nerve.

Authors:  S A Shamma
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1985-11       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  35 in total

1.  Robust Neuronal Discrimination in Primary Auditory Cortex Despite Degradations of Spectro-temporal Acoustic Details: Comparison Between Guinea Pigs with Normal Hearing and Mild Age-Related Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Yonane Aushana; Samira Souffi; Jean-Marc Edeline; Christian Lorenzi; Chloé Huetz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-01-04

2.  The role of recovered envelope cues in the identification of temporal-fine-structure speech for hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Agnès C Léger; Joseph G Desloge; Louis D Braida; Jayaganesh Swaminathan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Predictions of Speech Chimaera Intelligibility Using Auditory Nerve Mean-Rate and Spike-Timing Neural Cues.

Authors:  Michael R Wirtzfeld; Rasha A Ibrahim; Ian C Bruce
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-07-26

4.  Relative contributions of acoustic temporal fine structure and envelope cues for lexical tone perception in noise.

Authors:  Beier Qi; Yitao Mao; Jiaxing Liu; Bo Liu; Li Xu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Neural alpha dynamics in younger and older listeners reflect acoustic challenges and predictive benefits.

Authors:  Malte Wöstmann; Björn Herrmann; Anna Wilsch; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Optimal combination of neural temporal envelope and fine structure cues to explain speech identification in background noise.

Authors:  Il Joon Moon; Jong Ho Won; Min-Hyun Park; D Timothy Ives; Kaibao Nie; Michael G Heinz; Christian Lorenzi; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Encoding frequency contrast in primate auditory cortex.

Authors:  Brian J Malone; Brian H Scott; Malcolm N Semple
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Speech perception in noise with a harmonic complex excited vocoder.

Authors:  Tyler H Churchill; Alan Kan; Matthew J Goupell; Antje Ihlefeld; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-01-22

9.  Role of Binaural Temporal Fine Structure and Envelope Cues in Cocktail-Party Listening.

Authors:  Jayaganesh Swaminathan; Christine R Mason; Timothy M Streeter; Virginia Best; Elin Roverud; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 10.  Adaptive auditory computations.

Authors:  Shihab Shamma; Jonathan Fritz
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 6.627

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.