Literature DB >> 447913

Comparison of WKB and finite difference calculations for a two-dimensional cochlear model.

C R Steele, L A Taber.   

Abstract

There are many points of uncertainty in the subject of cochlear models. In this paper only the question of efficient computing methods is addressed. For the cochlear model with a one-dimensional approximation for the fluid motion, Zweig, Lipes, and Pierce [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 59, 975-982 (1976)] have shown that the WKB method agrees well with a direct numerical integration. For the two-dimensional fluid model, Neely [E.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA (1977)] has shown that a direct finite difference solution is an order of magnitude faster than the integral equation approach used by Allen [J. Acoust. Soc. Am 61, 110-119 (1977)]. In the present work, a formal WKB solution is derived following Whitham [Linear and Nonlinear Waves (Wiley, New York, 1974)]. The advantage of this formulation is simplicity, but the disadvantage is that no error estimate is available. We find that the numerical results from the WKB solution agree well with those of Neely (1977), while the computer time is reduced by another order of magnitude. Thus, the WKB method seems to offer the satisfactory accuracy, efficiency, and flexibility for treating the more realistic cochlear models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 447913     DOI: 10.1121/1.382569

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


  14 in total

1.  Analysis of the cochlear amplifier fluid pump hypothesis.

Authors:  Brissi Franck Zagadou; David C Mountain
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-04

2.  Dual traveling waves in an inner ear model with two degrees of freedom.

Authors:  Jessica S Lamb; Richard S Chadwick
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2011-08-16       Impact factor: 9.161

3.  Two-compartment passive frequency domain cochlea model allowing independent fluid coupling to the tectorial and basilar membranes.

Authors:  John Cormack; Yanju Liu; Jong-Hoon Nam; Sheryl M Gracewski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Frequency selectivity without resonance in a fluid waveguide.

Authors:  Marcel van der Heijden
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Modelling cochlear mechanics.

Authors:  Guangjian Ni; Stephen J Elliott; Mohammad Ayat; Paul D Teal
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 6.  Von Békésy and cochlear mechanics.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Olson; Hendrikus Duifhuis; Charles R Steele
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 7.  Analytical and numerical modeling of the hearing system: Advances towards the assessment of hearing damage.

Authors:  Annalisa De Paolis; Marom Bikson; Jeremy T Nelson; J Alexander de Ru; Mark Packer; Luis Cardoso
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Interplay between traveling wave propagation and amplification at the apex of the mouse cochlea.

Authors:  Amir Nankali; Christopher A Shera; Brian E Applegate; John S Oghalai
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 3.699

9.  The spatial pattern of cochlear amplification.

Authors:  Jonathan A N Fisher; Fumiaki Nin; Tobias Reichenbach; Revathy C Uthaiah; A J Hudspeth
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2012-12-06       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  Waves on Reissner's membrane: a mechanism for the propagation of otoacoustic emissions from the cochlea.

Authors:  Tobias Reichenbach; Aleksandra Stefanovic; Fumiaki Nin; A J Hudspeth
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 9.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.