A channel-selection criterion for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 129, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 3221-3232

  Kokkinakis, Kostas ^a   Hazrati, Oldooz ^a   Loizou, Philipos C ^a  

^a The University of Texas at Dallas   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COCHLEAR IMPLANT LISTENERS; CODING STRATEGY; FREQUENCY CHANNELS; INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS; OFFLINE; PERCENTAGE POINTS; REVERBERATION TIME; SELF-MASKING; TEMPORAL ENVELOPES;

ARCHITECTURAL ACOUSTICS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; EXPERIMENTS; SPEECH CODING; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

REVERBERATION;

AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PHONETICS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STANDARD; TIME;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTUAL DISTORTION; PHONETICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 79959588336     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.3559683     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Assmann, P. F., and Summerfield, Q. (2004). The perception of speech under adverse acoustic conditions., in Speech Processing in the Auditory System, edited by, S. Greenberg, W. A. Ainsworth, A. N. Popper, and, R. R. Fay, (Springer, New York), pp. 231-308.
2. Bolt, R. H., and MacDonald, A. D. (1949). Theory of speech masking by reverberation., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 21, 577-580.
3. Brungart, D., Chang, P., Simpson, B., and Wang, D. (2006). Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 4007-4018. (Pubitemid 44888096)
4. Furuya, K., and Kataoka, A. (2007). Robust speech dereverberation using multichannel blind deconvolution with spectral subtraction., IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 15, 1579-1591.
5. Haykin, S. (2000). Unsupervised Adaptive Filtering, Volume 2: Blind Deconvolution (Wiley, New York), pp. 1-12.
6. Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2008). A new sound coding strategy for suppressing noise in cochlear implants., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 498-509. (Pubitemid 352019339)
7. Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2010). Environment-specific noise suppression for improved speech intelligibility by cochlear implant users., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 3689-3695.
8. Huang, Y., Benesty, J., and Chen J. (2007). Dereverberation., in Springer Handbook of Speech Processing, edited by, J. Benesty, M. M. Sondhi, and, Y. Huang, (Springer, New York), pp. 929-943.
9. IEEE (1969). IEEE recommended practice speech quality measurements., IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. AU17, 225-246.
10. Kiefer, J., Hohl, S., Sturzebecher, E., Pfennigdorff, T., and Gstoettner, W. (2001). Comparison of speech recognition with different speech coding strategies (SPEAK, CIS, and ACE) and their relationship to telemetric measures of compound action potentials in the Nucleus CI 24M cochlear implant system., Audiology 40, 32-42. (Pubitemid 32229208)
11. Kim, G., Lu, Y., Hi, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2009). An algorithm that improves speech intelligibility in noise for normal-hearing listeners., J. Acoust Soc. Am. 126, 1486-1494.
12. Kjellberg, A. (2004). Effects of reverberation time on the cognitive load in speech communication: Theoretical considerations., Noise Health 7, 11-21. (Pubitemid 39654649)
13. Kokkinakis, K., and Loizou, P. C. (2009). Selective-tap blind dereverberation for two-microphone enhancement of reverberant speech., IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 16, 961-964.
14. Kokkinakis, K., and Loizou, P. C. (2010). Multi-microphone adaptive noise reduction strategies for coordinated stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant devices., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 3136-3144.
15. Krishnamoorthy, P., and Prasanna, S. R. (2009). Reverberant speech enhancement by temporal and spectral processing., IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 17, 253-266.
16. Li, N., and Loizou, P. C. (2008). Factors influencing intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech: Implications for noise reduction., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, 1673-1682. (Pubitemid 351379593)
17. Litovsky, R., Colburn, S., Yost, W., and Guzman, S. (1999). The precedence effect., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 1633-1654.
18. Loizou, P. C. (2006). Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants., in Cochlear and Brainstem Implants, edited by, A. Moller, (Karger, Basel, Switzerland), Vol. 64, pp. 109-143. (Pubitemid 44338657)
19. McDermott, H. J., McKay, C. M., and Vandali, A. E. (1992). A new portable sound processor for the University of MelbourneNucleus Limited multichannel cochlear implant., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 3367-3371.
20. McKay, C. M., and McDermott, H. J. (1993). Perceptual performance of subjects with cochlear implants using the Spectral Maxima Sound Processor (SMSP) and the Mini Speech Processor (MSP)., Ear Hear. 14, 350-367. (Pubitemid 23295112)
21. Miyoshi, M., and Kaneda, Y. (1988). Inverse filtering of room acoustics., IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 36, 145-152.
22. Nabelek, A. K., and Letowski, T. R. (1985). Vowel confusions of hearing-impaired listeners under reverberant and non-reverberant conditions., J. Speech Hear. Disord. 50, 126-131. (Pubitemid 15081695)
23. Nabelek, A. K., and Letowski, T. R. (1988). Similarities of vowels in non-reverberant and reverberant fields., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1891-1899.
24. Nabelek, A. K., Letowski, T. R., and Tucker, F. M. (1989). Reverberant overlap- and self-masking in consonant identification., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 86, 1259-1265. (Pubitemid 19270979)
25. Nabelek, A. K., and Picket, J. M. (1974). Monaural and binaural speech perception through hearing aids under noise and reverberation with normal and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Speech Hear. Res. 17, 724-739.
26. Neuman, A. C., Wroblewski, M., Hajicek, J., and Rubinstein, A. (2010). Combined effects of noise and reverberation on speech recognition performance of normal-hearing children and adults., Ear Hear. 31, 336-344.
27. Palomki, K. J., Brown, G. J., and Barker, J. P. (2004). Techniques for handling convolutional distortion with missing data' automatic speech recognition., Speech Commun. 43, 123-142.
28. Poissant, S. F., Whitmal, N. A., and Freyman, R. L. (2006). Effects of reverberation and masking on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 1606-1615. (Pubitemid 43326029)
29. Seeber, B., and Hafter, E. (2007). Precedence-effect with cochlear implant simulation., in Hearing-from Sensory Processing to Perception, edited by, B. Kollmeier, G. Klump, V. Hohmann, U. Langemann, M. Mauermann, S. Uppenkamp, and, J. Verhey, (Springer, Berlin, Germany), Chap., pp. 475-484.
30. Skinner, M., Holden, L. K., Whitford, L. A., Plant, K. L., Psarros, C., and Holden, T. A. (2002). Speech recognition with the Nucleus 24 SPEAK, ACE, and CIS speech coding strategies in newly implanted adults., Ear Hear. 23, 207-223. (Pubitemid 34625510)
31. Spahr, A., and Dorman, M. (2004). Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices., Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 130, 624-628. (Pubitemid 38609675)
32. Stevens, K. N. (2002). Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 1872-1891. (Pubitemid 34297244)
33. Van den Bogaert, T., Doclo, S., Wouters, J., and Moonen, M. (2009). Speech enhancement with multichannel Wiener filter techniques in multi-microphone binaural hearing aids., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 360-371.
34. Vandali, A. E., Whitford, L. A., Plant, K. L., and Clark, G. M. (2000). Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: Using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system., Ear Hear. 21, 608-624.
35. Wang, D. L., Kjems, U., Pedersen, M. S., Boldt, J. B., and Lunner, T. (2009). Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 2336-2347.
36. Whitmal, N. A, and Poissant, S. F. (2009). Effects of source-to-listener distance and masking on perception of cochlear implant processed speech in reverberant rooms., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 2556-2569.