Literature DB >> 24116434

The use of confusion patterns to evaluate the neural basis for concurrent vowel identification.

Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli1, Michael G Heinz.   

Abstract

Normal-hearing listeners take advantage of differences in fundamental frequency (F0) to segregate competing talkers. Computational modeling using an F0-based segregation algorithm and auditory-nerve temporal responses captures the gradual improvement in concurrent-vowel identification with increasing F0 difference. This result has been taken to suggest that F0-based segregation is the basis for this improvement; however, evidence suggests that other factors may also contribute. The present study further tested models of concurrent-vowel identification by evaluating their ability to predict the specific confusions made by listeners. Measured human confusions consisted of at most one to three confusions per vowel pair, typically from an error in only one of the two vowels. An improvement due to F0 difference was correlated with spectral differences between vowels; however, simple models based on acoustic and cochlear spectral patterns predicted some confusions not made by human listeners. In contrast, a neural temporal model was better at predicting listener confusion patterns. However, the full F0-based segregation algorithm using these neural temporal analyses was inconsistent across F0 difference in capturing listener confusions, being worse for smaller differences. The inability of this commonly accepted model to fully account for listener confusions suggests that other factors besides F0 segregation are likely to contribute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24116434      PMCID: PMC3799688          DOI: 10.1121/1.4820888

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


  37 in total

1.  Role of fundamental frequency differences in the perceptual separation of competing vowel sounds by listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss.

Authors:  K H Arehart; C A King; K S McLean-Mudgett
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Neural correlates of the pitch of complex tones. I. Pitch and pitch salience.

Authors:  P A Cariani; B Delgutte
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Effects of acoustic trauma on the representation of the vowel "eh" in cat auditory nerve fibers.

Authors:  R L Miller; J R Schilling; K R Franck; E D Young
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  A model for the responses of low-frequency auditory-nerve fibers in cat.

Authors:  L H Carney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Perceptual and computational separation of simultaneous vowels: cues arising from low-frequency beating.

Authors:  J F Culling; C J Darwin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Perceptual separation of simultaneous vowels: within and across-formant grouping by F0.

Authors:  J F Culling; C J Darwin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Antimasking effects of the olivocochlear reflex. II. Enhancement of auditory-nerve response to masked tones.

Authors:  T Kawase; B Delgutte; M C Liberman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Auditory selective attention in the human cochlea.

Authors:  M H Giard; L Collet; P Bouchet; J Pernier
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1994-01-07       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  Pitches of concurrent vowels.

Authors:  P F Assmann; D D Paschall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  FO processing and the separation of competing speech signals by listeners with normal hearing and with hearing loss.

Authors:  V Summers; M R Leek
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.297

View more
  8 in total

1.  Effects of age and hearing loss on concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Computational model predictions of cues for concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-07-08

3.  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

4.  Modeling the level-dependent changes of concurrent vowel scores.

Authors:  Harshavardhan Settibhaktini; Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Brainstem correlates of concurrent speech identification in adverse listening conditions.

Authors:  Anusha Yellamsetty; Gavin M Bidelman
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Modeling the effects of age and hearing loss on concurrent vowel scores.

Authors:  Harshavardhan Settibhaktini; Michael G Heinz; Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Revisiting Models of Concurrent Vowel Identification: The Critical Case of No Pitch Differences.

Authors:  Samuel S Smith; Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Michael G Heinz; Christian J Sumner
Journal:  Acta Acust United Acust       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct

8.  Effects of Physiological Internal Noise on Model Predictions of Concurrent Vowel Identification for Normal-Hearing Listeners.

Authors:  Mark S Hedrick; Il Joon Moon; Jihwan Woo; Jong Ho Won
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.