Additive noise can enhance temporal coding in a computational model of analogue cochlear implant stimulation

Hearing Research

Volumn 133, Issue 1-2, 1999, Pages 107-119

  Morse, Robert P ^a   Evans, Edward F ^a  

^a MacKay Inst Commun Neurosci S   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cochlear implant; Frankenhauser Huxley model; Noise; Speech coding; Stochastic resonance; Temporal coding

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COCHLEAR NERVE; CODING; COMPUTER MODEL; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; NOISE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH ANALYSIS; STOCHASTIC MODEL; VOWEL;

COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; COCHLEAR NERVE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DEAFNESS; HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NOISE; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 0032793624     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-5955(99)00062-3     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Adrian E.D. The all-or-nothing principle in nerve. J. Physiol. 47:1914;460-474.
2. Anderson D.J. Quantitative model for the effects of stimulus frequency on synchronization of auditory nerve discharges. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 54:1973;361-364.
3. Bostock H. The strength-duration relationship for excitation of myelinated nerve: computed dependence on membrane parameters. J. Physiol. 341:1983;59-74.
4. Box G.E.P., Muller M.A. A note on the generation of random normal deviates. Ann. Math. Stat. 29:1958;610.
5. Bulsara A.R., Gammaitoni L. Tuning into noise. Phys. Today. 49:1996;39-45.
6. Bütikofer R., Lawrence P.D. Electrocutaneous nerve stimulation - I: Model and experiment. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 25:1978;526-531.
7. Chialvo D.R., Longtin A., Müller-Gerking J. Stochastic resonance in models of neuronal assemblies. Phys. Rev. E. 55:1997;1798-1808.
8. Clopton, B.M., Spelman, F.A., Glass, I., Pfingst, B.E., Miller, J.M., Lawrence, P.D., Dean, D.P., 1983. Neural encoding of electrical signals. In: Parkins, C.W. and Anderson, S.W. (Eds.), Cochlear Prostheses: an International Symposium, Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 405, pp. 295-306.
9. Clopton B.M., Glass I. Unit responses at cochlear nucleus to electrical stimulation through a cochlear prosthesis. Hear. Res. 14:1984;1-11.
10. Collins J.J., Chow C.C., Imhoff T.T. Stochastic resonance without tuning. Nature. 376:1995;236-238.
11. Collins J.J., Imhoff T.T., Grigg P. Noise enhanced information transmission in rat SA1 cutaneous mechanoreceptors via aperiodic stochastic resonance. J. Neurophysiol. 76:1996;642-645.
12. Colombo J., Parkins C.W. A model of electrical excitation of the mammalian auditory system. Hear. Res. 31:1987;287-312.
13. Delattre P., Liberman A.M., Cooper F.S., Gerstman L.J. An experimental study of the acoustic determinants of vowel colour: observations of one- and two-formant vowels synthesized from spectrographic patterns. Word. 8:1952;195-211.
14. Delgutte B., Kiang N.Y.-S. Speech coding in the auditory nerve: I. Vowel-like sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 75:1984;866-878.
15. Dodge F.A., Frankenhauser B. Membrane currents in isolated frog nerve under voltage clamp conditions. J. Physiol. 143:1958;76-90.
16. Dodge F.A., Frankenhauser B. Sodium currents in the myelinated nerve fibre of Xenopus laevis investigated with the voltage clamp technique. J. Physiol. 148:1959;188-200.
17. Douglass J., Wilkens K., Pantazelou E., Moss F. Noise enhancement of information transfer in crayfish mechano-receptors by stochastic resonance. Nature. 365:1993;337-340.
18. Dykman M.I., Luchinsky D.G., Mannella R., McClintock P.V.E., Stein N.D., Stocks N.G. Stochastic resonance in perspective. Nuovo Cimento. 17:1995;661-683.
19. Eddington D.K., Dobelle W.H., Brackmann D.E., Mladejovsky M.G., Parkin J.L. Auditory prosthesis research with multiple channel intracochlear stimulation in man. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 87:(Suppl. 53):1978;5-39.
20. Erlanger, J., Gasser, H.S., 1937. Electrical Signs of Nervous Activity. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
21. Evans E.F. Place and time coding of frequency in the peripheral auditory system: some physiological pros and cons. Audiology. 17:1978;369-420.
22. Evans, E.F., 1991. Multi-channel cochlear implants: Signal processing by the cochlea: physiological ideal; Project Ear multi-channel cochlear implant. IEE Digest 179, pp. 2/1-2/3.
23. Frankenhauser B. Steady state inactivation of sodium permeability in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 148:1959;671-676.
24. Frankenhauser B. Quantitative description of sodium currents in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 151:1959;491-501.
25. Frankenhauser B. Delayed currents in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis investigated with voltage clamp technique. J. Physiol. 160:1962;40-45.
26. Frankenhauser B. Instantaneous potassium currents in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 160:1962;46-53.
27. Frankenhauser B. Potassium permeability in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 160:1962;54-61.
28. Frankenhauser B. A quantitative description of potassium currents in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 169:1963;424-430.
29. Frankenhauser B. Inactivation of the sodium-carrying mechanism in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 169:1963;445-451.
30. Frankenhauser B., Moore L.E. The effect of temperature on the sodium and potassium permeability changes in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 169:1963;431-437.
31. Frankenhauser B., Moore L.E. The specificity of the initial current in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. Voltage clamp experiments. J. Physiol. 169:1963;438-444.
32. Frankenhauser B., Huxley A.F. The action potential in the myelinated nerve fibre of Xenopus laevis as computed on the basis of voltage clamp data. J. Physiol. 171:1964;302-315.
33. Frijns J.H.M., ten Kate J.H. A model of myelinated nerve fibres for electrical prosthesis design. Med. Biol. Comp. 32:1994;391-398.
34. Fry, F.B., 1979. The Physics of Speech. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
35. Gantz B. Cochlear implants: an overview. Adv. Otol. Head Neck Surg. 1:1987;171-200.
36. Gantz B.J., Tyler R.S., Knutson J.F., Woodworth G., Abbas P., McCabe B.F., Hinrichs J., Tye-Murray N., Lansing C., Kuk F., Brown C. Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: audiological assessment of performance and predictors of performance. Laryngoscope. 98:1988;1100-1106.
37. Gasser H.S., Erlanger J. The rôle played by the sizes of the constituent fibres of a nerve trunk in determining the form of its action potential wave. Am. J. Physiol. 86:1926;522-547.
38. Gasser H.S., Grundfest H. Axon diameters in relation to the spike dimensions and conduction velocity in mammalian A fibres. Am. J. Physiol. 127:1939;393-414.
39. Goldberg J.M., Brown P.B. Responses of binaural neurons of dog superior olivary complex to dichotic tonal stimuli: some physiological mechanisms of sound localization. J. Neurophysiol. 32:1969;613-636.
40. Goldman L., Albus J.S. Computation of impulse conduction in myelinated fibres; theoretical basis of the velocity-diameter relation. Biophysics. 8:1968;596-607.
41. Harding, R.D., Quinney, D.A. 1986. A Simple Introduction to Numerical Analysis. Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol.
42. Hartmann R., Topp G., Klinke R. Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibres with electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear. Res. 13:1984;47-62.
43. Hartmann W.M. Pitch, periodicity, and auditory organisation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100:1996;3491-3502.
44. van den Honert C., Stypulkowski P.H. Temporal response patterns of single auditory nerve fibres elicited by periodic electrical stimuli. Hear. Res. 29:1987;207-222.
45. Hutchinson N.A., Koles Z.J., Smith R.S. Conduction velocity in myelinated nerve fibres of Xenopus laevis. J. Physiol. 208:1970;279-289.
46. Kiang N.Y.-S., Moxon E.C. Physiological considerations in artificial stimulation of the inner ear. Ann. Otol. 81:1972;714-730.
47. Klatt D.H. Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 67:1980;971-995.
48. Knauth M., Hartmann R., Klinke R. Discharge pattern in the auditory nerve evoked by vowel stimuli: a comparison between acoustical and electrical stimulation. Hear. Res. 74:1994;247-258.
49. Levin J.E., Miller J.P. Broadband neural encoding in the cricket circal sensory system enhanced by stochastic resonance. Nature. 380:1996;165-168.
50. Loeb G.E. Cochlear prosthetics. Ann. Rev. Neurosci. 13:1990;357-371.
51. Merzenich, M.M., White, M.W., 1977. Cochlear implants: the interface problem. In: Hambrecht, F.T., Reswick, J. (Eds.), Functional Electrical Stimulation: Applications in Neural Prostheses, Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 321-340.
52. Millar J.B., Tong Y.C., Clark G.M. Speech processing for cochlear implant prostheses. J. Speech Hear. Res. 27:1984;280-296.
53. Miller R.L., Schilling J.R., Franck K.R., Young E.D. Effects of acoustic trauma on the representation of the vowel /ε/ in cat auditory nerve fibres. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101:1997;3602-3616.
54. Moore, B.C.J., 1985. Speech coding for cochlear implants. In: Gray, R.F. (Ed.), Cochlear Implants, Croom Helm, London, pp. 163-179.
55. Moore J.W., Joyner R.W., Brill M.H., Waxman S.D., Najar-Joa M. Simulations of conduction in uniform myelinated fibres: relative sensitivity to changes in nodal and internodal parameters. Biophys. J. 21:1978;147-160.
56. Morse R.P., Evans E.F. Enhancement of vowel coding for cochlear implants by addition of noise. Nat. Med. 2:1996;928-932.
57. Morse, R.P., 1997. Studies of Temporal Coding for Analogue Cochlear Implants using Animal and Computational Models: Benefits of Noise. Ph.D. thesis, Keele University.
58. Morse R.P., Meyer G.F., Evans E.F. Exploitation of current spread to obtain independent stimulation of cochlear nerve fibres by a cochlear implant. Br. J. Audiol. 32:1998;111-112.
59. Motz H., Rattay F. A study of the application of the Hodgkin-Huxley and the Frankenhauser-Huxley model for electrical stimulation of the acoustic nerve. Neuroscience. 18:1986;699-712.
60. Paintal A.S. The influence of diameter of medullated nerve fibres of cat on the rising and falling phases of the spike and its recovery. J. Physiol. 184:1966;791-811.
61. Palmer A.R., Winter I.M., Darwin C.J. Representation of steady-state vowel sounds in the temporal discharge patterns of the guinea-pig cochlear nerve and primary-like cochlear nucleus neurons. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 79:1986;100-113.
62. Parkin, J.L., McCandless, G.A., Youngblood, J., 1987. Utah design multichannel cochlear implant (Ineraid). In: Banfai, P. (Ed.), Cochlear Implants: Current Situation, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 429-461.
63. Parkin J.L., Randolf L.J., Parkin B.D. Multichannel (Ineraid) cochlear implant update. Laryngoscope. 103:1993;835-840.
64. Peterson G.E., Lehiste I. Duration of syllable nuclei in English. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 32:1960;693-703.
65. Pfingst B.E. Stimulation and encoding strategies for cochlear implants. Otol. Clin. N. Am. 19:1986;219-235.
66. Phan, T.T., White, M.W., Finley, C.C., Cartee, L.A., 1994. Neural membrane model responses to sinusoidal electrical stimuli. In: Hochmair-Desoyer, I.J. and Hochmair E.S. (Eds.), Advances in Cochlear Implants, Manz, Vienna, pp. 342-347.
67. Plomp R., Pols L.C.W., van de Geer J.P. Dimensional analysis of vowel spectra. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 41:1967;707-712.
68. Pols L.C.W., van der Kamp L.J.T., Plomp R. Perceptual and physical space of vowel sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 46:1969;458-467.
69. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P., 1988. Numerical recipes in C. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
70. Rattay F., Aberham M. Modelling axon membranes for functional electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 40:1993;1201-1209.
71. Rosen, S., 1996. Cochlear implants. In: Stephens, D. (Ed.), Scott-Brown's Otolarngology, 6th edn., Vol. 2, Adult Audiology, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, pp. 1-21.
72. Rosen S.R., Fourcin A.J., Moore B.C.J. Voice pitch as an aid to lip-reading. Nature. 291:1981;150-153.
73. Schindler R.A., Kessler D.K. Clarion cochlear implant: phase I investigational results. Am. J. Otol. 14:1993;263-272.
74. Shannon R.V. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear. Res. 11:1983;157-189.
75. Simmons F.B. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. Arch. Otolaryngol. 84:1966;2-53.
76. Spoendlin H., Shrott A. Analysis of the human auditory nerve. Hear. Res. 43:1989;25-38.
77. Stevens, K.N., 1983. Acoustic properties used for the identification of speech. In: Parkins, C.W., Anderson, S.W. (Eds.), Cochlear Prostheses: an International Symposium, Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 405, pp. 2-17.
78. Tong Y.C., Clark G.M., Seligman P.M., Patrick J.F. Speech processing for a multiple electrode cochlear implant hearing prosthesis. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68:1980;1897-1899.
79. Tyler R.S., Tye-Murray N., Moore B.C.J., McCabe B.F. Synthetic two-formant vowel perception by some of the better cochlear implant patients. Audiology. 28:1989;301-315.
80. Wiesenfeld, K., 1993. An introduction to stochastic resonance. In: Buchler, J.R., Kandrup, H. (Eds.), Stochastic Resonance in Astrophysics, Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 706, pp. 13-25.
81. Wiesenfeld K., Moss F. Stochastic resonance and the benefits of noise: from ice ages to crayfish and SQUIDs. Nature. 373:1995;33-36.
82. Young E.D., Sachs M.B. Representation of steady state vowels in the temporal aspects of the discharge patterns of populations of auditory nerve fibres. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 66:1979;1381-1403.