Effect of ambient sound masking on the accuracy of computerized speech recognition

Radiology

Volumn 252, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 691-695

  Zwemer, Jonah ^a   Lenhart, Abigail ^a   Kim, Woojin ^b   Siddiqui, Khan M ^c   Siegel, Eliot L ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; AUDITORY MASKING; AUTOMATIC SPEECH RECOGNITION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECHOGRAPHY; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGIST; RADIOLOGY DEPARTMENT; SOUND; SOUND PRESSURE; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE, OCCUPATIONAL; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST; SPEECH RECOGNITION SOFTWARE;

EID: 70349284590     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2531081080     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Lippmann RP, Carlson BA. Speech recognition by humans and machines under conditions with severe channel variability and noise. In: Rogers SK, ed. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 1997 - applications and science of artificial neural networks III. Vol 3077. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optical Engineering, 1997; 46-57.
2. Siddiqui KM, Chia S, Knight N, Siegel EL. Design and ergonomic considerations for the filmless environment. J Am Coll Radiol 2006;3:456-467. (Pubitemid 43775802)
3. Cohen S. After effects of stress on human performance and social behavior: a review of research and theory. Psychol Bull 1980;88:82-108.
4. Evans GW, Johnson D. Stress and open-office noise. J Appl Psychol 2000;85:779-783.
5. Jones D. The cognitive psychology of auditory distraction: 1997 Broadbent Lecture. Br J Psychol 1999;90:167-187.
6. Junqua JC. The influence of psychoacoustic and psycholinguistic factors on listener judgments of intelligibility of normal and Lombard speech. Proc IEEE Int Conf Acoustics Speech Signal Proc 1991;1:361-364.
7. Chi SM, Oh YH. Lombard effect: compensation and noise suppression for noisy Lombard speech recognition. Presented at the Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Philadelphia, Pa, December 6, 1996.
8. Junqua JC, Fincke S, Field K. The Lombard effect: a reflex to better communicate with others in noise. Proc IEEE Int Conf Acoustics Speech Signal Proc 1999;4:2083-2086.
9. Fox RK, Josephson JR. Explicit noise hypotheses in speech recognition. In: Chen SS, ed. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 1993-neural and stochastic methods in image and signal processing II. Vol 2032. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optical Engineering, 1993; 245-255.
10. Hermus K, Wambacq P, Van Hamme H. A review of signal subspace speech enhancement and its application to noise robust speech recognition [abstr]. EURASIP J Appl Signal Proc 2007; 2007(1):195.