Literature DB >> 23927111

Using channel-specific statistical models to detect reverberation in cochlear implant stimuli.

Jill M Desmond1, Leslie M Collins, Chandra S Throckmorton.   

Abstract

Reverberation is especially detrimental for cochlear implant listeners; thus, mitigating its effects has the potential to provide significant improvements to cochlear implant communication. Efforts to model and correct for reverberation in acoustic listening scenarios can be quite complex, requiring estimation of the room transfer function and localization of the source and receiver. However, due to the limited resolution associated with cochlear implant stimulation, simpler processing for reverberation detection and mitigation may be possible for cochlear implants. This study models speech stimuli in a cochlear implant on a per-channel basis both in quiet and in reverberation, and assesses the efficacy of these models for detecting the presence of reverberation. This study was able to successfully detect reverberation in cochlear implant pulse trains, and the results appear to be robust to varying room conditions and cochlear implant stimulation parameters. Reverberant signals were detected 100% of the time for a long reverberation time of 1.2 s and 86% of the time for a shorter reverberation time of 0.5 s.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23927111      PMCID: PMC3745505          DOI: 10.1121/1.4812273

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


  15 in total

1.  Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implantees with a two-microphone monaural adaptive noise reduction system.

Authors:  J Wouters; J Vanden Berghe
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Blind estimation of reverberation time.

Authors:  Rama Ratnam; Douglas L Jones; Bruce C Wheeler; William D O'Brien; Charissa R Lansing; Albert S Feng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Effects of reverberation time on the cognitive load in speech communication: theoretical considerations.

Authors:  A Kjellberg
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2004 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 0.867

4.  Spectral subtraction-based speech enhancement for cochlear implant patients in background noise.

Authors:  Li-Ping Yang; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: a comparison of sound-processing strategies.

Authors:  Andrew E Vandali; Catherine Sucher; David J Tsang; Colette M McKay; Jason W D Chew; Hugh J McDermott
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Evaluation of noise reduction systems for cochlear implant users in different acoustic environment.

Authors:  V Hamacher; W H Doering; G Mauer; H Fleischmann; J Hennecke
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1997-11

7.  Reverberant overlap- and self-masking in consonant identification.

Authors:  A K Nábĕlek; T R Letowski; F M Tucker
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Similarities of vowels in nonreverberant and reverberant fields.

Authors:  A K Nábĕlek; T R Letowski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  M Nilsson; S D Soli; J A Sullivan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Evaluation of a portable two-microphone adaptive beamforming speech processor with cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  R J van Hoesel; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.