Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies I: Instrumental Evaluation

Trends in Hearing

Volumn 19, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Baumgärtel, Regina M ^a,b   Krawczyk Becker, Martin ^a,b   Marquardt, Daniel ^a,b   Völker, Christoph ^a,b   Hu, Hongmei ^a,b   Herzke, Tobias ^b,c   Coleman, Graham ^b,c   Adiloğlu, Kamil ^b,c   Ernst, Stephan M A ^a,b   Gerkmann, Timo ^a,b   Doclo, Simon ^a,b   Kollmeier, Birger ^a,b   Hohmann, Volker ^a,b,c   Dietz, Mathias ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OLDENBURG   (Germany)

^b Cluster of Excellence Hearing4all   (Germany)

^c Center of Competence HörTech GGmbH   (Germany)

Author keywords

audio quality; binaural; instrumental evaluation; signal enhancement; speech intelligibility

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NOISE; NOISE REDUCTION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; TIMBRE; ACOUSTICS; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; EVALUATION STUDY; HEARING; HEARING AID; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; PHYSIOLOGY; PREVENTION AND CONTROL;

ACOUSTICS; ALGORITHMS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; NOISE; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

EID: 84965182118     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23312165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2331216515617916     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. American National Standard Institute. (1997). Methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index. Washington, DC: Author(ANSI 20S3.5-1997).
2. Baumgärtel, R., Hu, H., Krawczyk-Becker, M., Marquardt, D., Herzke, T., Coleman, G., …;Dietz, M. (2015). Comparing binaural pre-processing strategies II: Speech intelligibility of bilateral cochlear implant users. Trends in Hearing, 19, 1–18.
3. Bentler, R. A. (2005). Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: A systematic review of the evidence. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 16, 473–484.
4. Breithaupt, C., Krawczyk, M., & Martin, R. (2008). Parameterized MMSE spectral magnitude estimation for the enhancement of noisy speech. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 4037–4040. doi:10.1109/ICASSP.2008.4518540.
5. Brockmeyer, A. M., & Potts, L. G. (2011). Evaluation of different signal processing options in unilateral and bilateral cochlear freedom implant recipients using R-space back-ground noise. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 22(2), 65–80.
6. Chan, D., Fourcin, A., Gibbon, D., Granstrom, B., Huckvale, M., Kokkinakis, G., …;Zeiliger, J. (1995). EUROM—A spoken language resource for the EU. Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Speech Communication and Speech Technology, 1, 867–870.
7. Cornelis, B., Moonen, M., & Wouters, J. (2012). Speech intelligibility improvements with hearing aids using bilateral and binaural adaptive multichannel Wiener filtering based noise reduction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(6), 4743–4755.
8. Doclo, S., Gannot, S., Moonen, M., & Spriet, A. (2010). Acoustic beamforming for hearing aid applications. In S. Haykin, & K. Ray Liu (Eds.), Handbook on array processing and sensor networks (pp. 269–302). Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley Chapter 9.
9. Doclo, S., Kellermann, W., Makino, S., & Nordholm, S. (2015). Multichannel signal enhancement algorithms for assisted listening devices: Exploiting spatial diversity using multiple microphones. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 32(2), 18–30.
10. Elko, G. W., & Anh-Tho Nguyen, P. (1995). A simple adaptive first-order differential microphone. IEEE ASSP Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics, 169–172. doi:10.1109/ASPAA.1995.482983.
11. Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88(4), 1725–1736.
12. Fink, N., Furst, M., & Muchnik, C. (2012). Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 132(3), 1718–1731.
13. Gannot, S., Burshtein, D., & Weinstein, E. (2001). Signal enhancement using beamforming and nonstationarity with applications to speech. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 49(8), 1614–1626.
14. Gannot, S., & Cohen, I. (2007). Adaptive beamforming and postfiltering. In J. Benesty, Y. Huang, & M. M. Sondhi (Eds.), Springer handbook of speech processing (pp. 199–228). Springer: New York, NY, USA.
15. Gerkmann, T., Breithaupt, C., & Martin, R. (2008). Improved a posteriori speech presence probability estimation based on a likelihood ratio with fixed priors. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 16(5), 910–919.
16. Gerkmann, T., & Hendriks, R. C. (2012). Unbiased MMSE-based noise power estimation with low complexity and low tracking delay. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 20(4), 1383–1393.
17. Greenberg, J. E., Peterson, P. M., & Zurek, P. M. (1993). Intelligibility-weighted measures of speech-to-interference ratio and speech system performance. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94(5), 3009–3010.
18. Griffiths, L. J., & Jim, C. (1982). An alternative approach to linearly constrained adaptive beamforming. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 30(1), 27–34.
19. Grimm, G., Herzke, T., Berg, D., & Hohmann, V. (2006). The master hearing aid: A PC-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 92(4), 618–628.
20. Grimm, G., Hohmann, V., & Kollmeier, B. (2009). Increase and subjective evaluation of feedback stability in hearing aids by a binaural coherence-based noise reduction scheme. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 17(7), 1408–1419.
21. Hagerman, B., & Olofsson, A. (2004). A method to measure the effect of noise reduction algorithms using simultaneous speech and noise. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 90(2), 356–361.
22. Hamacher, V., Kornagel, U., Lotter, T., & Puder, H. (2008). Binaural signal processing in hearing aids: Technologies and algorithms. In R. Martin, U. Heute, C. Antweiler, & H. Puder (Eds.), Advances in digital speech transmission (pp. 401–429). New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
23. Healy, E. W., Yoho, S. E., Wang, Y., & Wang, D. (2013). An algorithm to improve speech recognition in noise for hear-ing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134(4), 3029–3038.
24. Hendriks, R., & Gerkmann, T. (2012). Noise correlation matrix estimation for multi-microphone speech enhance-ment. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 20(1), 223–233.
25. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. (2008). Evaluation of objective quality measures for speech enhancement. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 16(1), 229–238.
26. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2007a). A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122(3), 1777–1786.
27. Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2007b). Subjective comparison and evaluation of speech enhancement algorithms. Speech Communication, 49(7), 588–601.
28. Hu, H., Mohammadiha, N., Taghia, J., Leijon, A., Lutman, M. E., & Wang, S. (2012). Sparsity level in a non-negative matrix factorization based speech strategy in cochlear implants. In: Proceedings of the 20th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO 2012) (pp. 2432–2436).
29. ITU-T. (2001). ITU-T. Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ): An objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrow-band telephone networks and speech codecs (ITU-T recommendation P.862). Geneva, Switzerland.
30. Kayser, H., Ewert, S. D., Anemüller, J., Rohdenburg, T., Hohmann, V, Kollmeier, B. (2009). Database of multichan-nel in-ear and behind-the-ear head-related and binaural room impulse responses. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, 2009(1), 298605.
31. Kim, G., Lu, Y., Hu, Y., & Loizou, P. C. (2009). An algorithm that improves speech intelligibility in noise for normal-hear-ing listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126(3), 1486–1494.
32. Levitt, H. (2001). Noise reduction in hearing aids: A review. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 38, 111–121.
33. Lotter, T. (2004). Single and Multimicrophone Speech Enhancement for Hearing Aids (PhD thesis). RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
34. Luts, H., Eneman, K., Wouters, J., Schulte, M., Vormann, M., Buechler, M., …;Spriet, A. (2010). Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127(3), 1491–1505.
35. Peters, R. W., Moore, B. C. J., & Baer, T. (1998). Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103(1), 577–587.
36. Plomp, R., & Mimpen, A. M. (1981). Effect of the orientation of the speaker’s head and the azimuth of a noise source on the speech-reception threshold for sentences. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 48(5), 325–328.
37. Qin, M. K., & Oxenham, A. J. (2003). Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114(1), 446–454.
38. Rix, A., Beerends, J., Hollier, M., & Hekstra, A. (2001). Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ)—A new method for speech quality assessment of telephone networks and codecs. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2, 749–752.
39. Rohdenburg, T. (2008). Development and objective perceptual quality assessment of monaural and binaural noise reduction schemes for hearing aids (PhD dissertation). University of Oldenburg, Germany.
40. Shynk, J. (1992). Frequency-domain and multirate adaptive filtering. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 9(1), 14–37.
41. Simmer, K., Bitzer, J., & Marro, C. (2001). Post-filtering tech-niques. In M. Brandstein, & D. Ward (Eds.), Microphone arrays: Signal processing techniques and applications (pp. 39–57). Berlin, Germany: Springer, Chapter 3.
42. Stickney, G. S., Zeng, F. G., Litovsky, R., & Assmann, P. (2004). Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(2), 1081–1091.
43. Taal, C. H., Hendriks, R. C., Heusdens, R., & Jensen, J. (2011). An evaluation of objective measures for intelligibility prediction of time-frequency weighted noisy speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(5), 3013–3027.
44. Van den Bogaert, T., Doclo, S., Wouters, J., & Moonen, M. (2009). Speech enhancement with multichannel Wiener filter techniques in multimicrophone binaural hearing aids. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(1), 360–371.
45. Van Veen, B., & Buckley, K. (1988). Beamforming: A versatile approach to spatial filtering. IEEE ASSP Magazine, 5(2), 4–24.
46. Vo¨lker, C., Warzybok, A., & Ernst, S. M. A. (2015). Comparing binaural pre-processing strategies III: Speech intelligibility of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired lis-teners. Trends in Hearing, 19, 1–18.
47. Wagener, K., Brand, T., & Kollmeier, B. (1999). Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests fu¨r die deutsche Sprache III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests [Development and Evaluation of a Sentence Test for the German Language III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg Sentence Test]. Zeitschrift fu¨r Audiologie, 38(3), 86–95.
48. Wouters, J., Doclo, S., Koning, R., & Francart, T. (2013). Sound processing for better coding of monaural and bin-aural cues in auditory prostheses. Proceedings of the IEEE, 101(9), 1986–1997.
49. Yousefian, N., & Loizou, P. (2012). A dual-microphone speech enhancement algorithm based on the coherence function. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 20(2), 599–609.