Literature DB >> 9328890

Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor.

K E Fishman1, R V Shannon, W H Slattery.   

Abstract

Speech recognition was measured in listeners with the Nucleus-22 SPEAK speech processing strategy as a function of the number of electrodes. Speech stimuli were analyzed into 20 frequency bands and processed according to the usual SPEAK processing strategy. In the normal clinical processor each electrode is assigned to represent the output of one filter. To create reduced-electrode processors the output of several adjacent filters were directed to a single electrode, resulting in processors with 1, 2, 4, 7, 10, and 20 electrodes. The overall spectral bandwidth was preserved, but the number of active electrodes was progressively reduced. After a 2-day period of adjustment to each processor, speech recognition performance was measured on medial consonants, vowels, monosyllabic words, and sentences. Performance with a single electrode processor was poor in all listeners, and average performance increased dramatically on all test materials as the number of electrodes was increased from 1 to 4. No differences in average performance were observed on any test in the 7-, 10-, and 20-electrode conditions. On sentence and consonant tests there was no difference between average performance with the 4-electrode and 20-electrode processors. This pattern of results suggests that cochlear implant listeners are not able to make full use of the spectral information on all 20 electrodes. Further research is necessary to understand the reasons for this limitation and to understand how to increase the amount of spectral information in speech received by implanted listeners.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9328890     DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4005.1201

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  108 in total

1.  Cortical responses to cochlear implant stimulation: channel interactions.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-10-20

2.  Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Li Xu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-11-20

3.  Relative importance of temporal envelope and fine structure in lexical-tone perception.

Authors:  Li Xu; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Features of stimulation affecting tonal-speech perception: implications for cochlear prostheses.

Authors:  Li Xu; Yuhjung Tsai; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 5.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

6.  Effect of stimulation rate on cochlear implant users' phoneme, word and sentence recognition in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  Robert V Shannon; Rachel J Cruz; John J Galvin
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  The Effect of Residual Acoustic Hearing and Adaptation to Uncertainty on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; Ashley Farris-Trimble; Michael Seedorff; Hannah Rigler
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modulations.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Kaibao Nie; Ginger S Stickney; Ying-Yee Kong; Michael Vongphoe; Ashish Bhargave; Chaogang Wei; Keli Cao
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-01-27       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  The process of spoken word recognition in the face of signal degradation.

Authors:  Ashley Farris-Trimble; Bob McMurray; Nicole Cigrand; J Bruce Tomblin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Development of visual attention skills in prelingually deaf children who use cochlear implants.

Authors:  D L Horn; R A O Davis; D B Pisoni; R T Miyamoto
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.