Signal-to-noise ratio adaptive post-filtering method for intelligibility enhancement of telephone speech

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 132, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 3990-4001

  Jokinen, Emma ^a   Yrttiaho, Santeri ^a   Pulakka, Hannu ^a   Vainio, Martti ^b   Alku, Paavo ^a  

^a AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMBIENT NOISE; BACKGROUND NOISE; FLAT FREQUENCY RESPONSE; HIGH-PASS; HIGHER FREQUENCIES; NOISE CONDITIONS; POST-FILTERING; POST-FILTERING ALGORITHM; POSTFILTERS; QUALITY OF SPEECH; SUBJECTIVE LISTENING TEST; TELEPHONE SPEECH; TRANSFER ENERGY;

HIGH PASS FILTERS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; TELEPHONE; TELEPHONE SETS;

SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ALGORITHM; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOBILE PHONE; NOISE; PERCEPTION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; VOICE;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ALGORITHMS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CELLULAR PHONE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST; VOICE QUALITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84870926927     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.4765074     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. 3GPP, TS 26.090 (2008). Adaptive multi-rate (AMR) speech codec: Transcoding functions., 3rd Generation Partnership Project, Valbonne, France, version 8.0.0.
2. 3GPP, TS 26.104 (2009). ANSI-C code for the floating-point adaptive multi-rate (AMR) speech codec., 3rd Generation Partnership Project, Valbonne, France, version 9.0.0.
3. Bhattacharya, A., and Zeng, F.-G. (2007). Companding to improve cochlear-implant speech recognition in speech-shaped noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 1079-1089. 10.1121/1.2749710
4. Chen, J.-H., and Gersho, A. (1995). Adaptive postfiltering for quality enhancement of coded speech., IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 3, 59-71. 10.1109/89.365380
5. Ephraim, Y., and Malah, D. (1985). Speech enhancement using a minimum mean-square error log-spectral amplitude estimator., IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process. 33, 443-445. 10.1109/TASSP.1985.1164550
6. Grancharov, V., Plasberg, J. H., Samuelsson, J., and Kleijn, W. B. (2008). Generalized postfilter for speech quality enhancement., IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 16, 57-64. 10.1109/TASL.2007.909327
7. Gustafsson, H., Nordholm, S. E., and Claesson, I. (2001). Spectral subtraction using reduced delay convolution and adaptive averaging., IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 9, 799-807. 10.1109/89.966083
8. Hall, J. L., and Flanagan, J. L. (2010). Intelligibility and listener preference of telephone speech in the presence of babble noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127, 280-285. 10.1121/1.3263603
9. Hazan, V., and Simpson, A. (1998). The effect of cue-enhancement on the intelligibility of nonsense word and sentence materials presented in noise., Speech Commun. 24, 211-226. 10.1016/S0167-6393(98)00011-9
10. Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2003). A generalized subspace approach for enhancing speech corrupted by colored noise., IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 11, 334-341. 10.1109/TSA.2003.814458
11. Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2004). Speech enhancement based on wavelet thresholding the multitaper spectrum., IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 12, 59-67. 10.1109/TSA.2003.819949
12. Hu, Y., and Loizou, P. C. (2007). A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 1777-1786. 10.1121/1.2766778
13. ITU-T, G.191 (2005). Recommendation, G. 191: Software tools for speech and audio coding standardization., International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, Switzerland.
14. ITU-T, P.56 (1993). Recommendation, P. 56: Objective measurement of active speech level., International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, Switzerland.
15. ITU-T Users Group on Software Tools (2005). ITU-T Software Tool Library 2005 Users Manual, International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, Switzerland.
16. Kim, G., and Loizou, P. C. (2011). Gain-induced speech distortions and the absence of intelligibility benefit with existing noise-reduction algorithms., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 1581-1596. 10.1121/1.3619790
17. Loizou, P. C. (2011). Speech quality assessment., in Multimedia Analysis, Processing and Communications (Springer, Berlin), pp. 623-654.
18. Loizou, P. C., and Kim, G. (2011). Reasons why current speech-enhancement algorithms do not improve speech intelligibility and suggested solutions., IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 19, 47-56. 10.1109/TASL.2010.2045180
19. Möller, S., and Raake, A. (2002). Telephone speech quality prediction: Towards network planning and monitoring models for modern network scenarios., Speech Commun. 38, 47-75. 10.1016/S0167-6393(01)00043-7
20. Niederjohn, R. J., and Grotelueschen, J. H. (1976). The enhancement of speech intelligibility in high noise levels by high-pass filtering followed by rapid amplitude compression., IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process. 24, 277-282. 10.1109/TASSP.1976.1162824
21. Oxenham, A. J., Simonson, A. M., Turicchia, L., and Sarpeshkar, R. (2007). Evaluation of companding-based spectral enhancement using simulated cochlear-implant processing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 1709-1716. 10.1121/1.2434757
22. Sauert, B., and Vary, P. (2006). Near end listening enhancement: Speech intelligibility improvement in noisy environments., in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vol. 1, pp. 493-496.
23. Skowronski, M. D., and Harris, J. G. (2006). Applied principles of clear and Lombard speech for automated intelligibility enhancement in noisy environments., Speech Commun. 48, 549-558. 10.1016/j.specom.2005.09.003
24. Summers, W. V., Pisoni, D. B., Bernacki, R. H., Pedlow, R. I., and Stokes, M. A. (1988). Effects of noise on speech production: Acoustic and perceptual analyses., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 84, 917-928. 10.1121/1.396660
25. Tang, Y., and Cooke, M. (2010). Energy reallocation strategies for speech enhancement in known noise conditions., in Proceedings of Interspeech, pp. 1636-1639.
26. Tang, Y., and Cooke, M. (2011). Subjective and objective evaluation of speech intelligibility enhancement under constant energy and duration constraints., in Proceedings of Interspeech, pp. 345-348.
27. Vainio, M., Suni, A., Järveläinen, H., Järvikivi, J., and Mattila, V.-V. (2005). Developing a speech intelligibility test based on measuring speech reception thresholds in noise for English and Finnish., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118, 1742-1750. 10.1121/1.1993129
28. Varga, A., and Steeneken, H. J. (1993). Assessment for automatic speech recognition: II. NOISEX-92: A database and an experiment to study the effect of additive noise on speech recognition systems., Speech Commun. 12, 247-251. 10.1016/0167-6393(93)90095-3
29. Wältermann, M., Raake, A., and Möller, S. (2010). Quality dimensions of narrowband and wideband speech transmission., Acta Acust. Acust. 96, 1090-1103. 10.3813/AAA.918370
30. Yoo, S. D., Boston, J. R., El-Jaroudi, A., and Li, C.-C. (2007). Speech signal modification to increase intelligibility in noisy environments., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 1138-1149. 10.1121/1.2751257