Effect of the Number of Maxima and Stimulation Rate on Phoneme Perception Patterns Using Cochlear Implant Simulation

Over the past few decades, cochlear implants (CIs) have become an alternate solution to hearing aids for people with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Despite scientists’ continuous efforts to facilitate hearing ability, however, there are still unresolved issues that CI users’ experience (e.g., fine speech perception, speech perception in noise, and music perception). When CI patients complain about these issues, one of the primary methods audiologists can employ is to adjust the mapping parameters to resolve their perceptual complaints. Numerous investigations have studied changes in signal processing strategies Purpose: Maximizing speech perception for cochlear implant (CI) users can be achieved by adjusting mapping parameters. The object of this study was to investigate optimal sets of parameters of stimulation rate and the number of maxima in the CI system.

[1]  Adnen Cherif Comparison of IIR Filterbanks and FFT Filterbanks in Cochlear Implant Speech Processing Strategies , 2012 .

[2]  M. D. Wang,et al.  Consonant confusions in noise: a study of perceptual features. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[4]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  A high rate n-of-m speech processing strategy for the first generation Clarion cochlear implant , 2009, International journal of audiology.

[5]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[6]  M. Halle,et al.  English stress : its form, its growth, and its role in verse , 1977 .

[7]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Spectral and Temporal Cues in Cochlear Implant Speech Perception , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[8]  Komal Arora,et al.  Electrical stimulation rate effects on speech perception in cochlear implants , 2009, International journal of audiology.

[9]  Jacquelyn Baudhuin,et al.  Optimization of programming parameters in children with the advanced bionics cochlear implant. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[10]  Colleen Psarros,et al.  Speech Recognition with the Nucleus 24 SPEAK, ACE, and CIS Speech Coding Strategies in Newly Implanted Adults , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[11]  L. Auger The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America , 1949 .

[12]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Effects of Stimulation Rate with the Nucleus 24 ACE Speech Coding Strategy , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[13]  W Baumgartner,et al.  Optimization of channel number and stimulation rate for the fast continuous interleaved sampling strategy in the COMBI 40+. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[14]  P M Seligman,et al.  Vowel and consonant recognition of cochlear implant patients using formant-estimating speech processors. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R. Jakobson Child Language, Aphasia and Phonological Universals , 1980 .

[16]  Li Xu,et al.  Spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition in noise. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  M. Dorman,et al.  The effect of parametric variations of cochlear implant processors on speech understanding. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  M F Dorman,et al.  The Identification of Consonants and Vowels by Cochlear Implant Patients Using a 6‐Channel Continuous Interleaved Sampling Processor and by Normal‐Hearing Subjects Using Simulations of Processors with Two to Nine Channels , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[19]  R. Smits,et al.  Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  N. Tye‐Murray,et al.  Relationships between speech production and speech perception skills in young cochlear-implant users. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  H. Levitt,et al.  Predicting consonant confusions from acoustic analysis. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Leslie M. Collins,et al.  The Effects of Noise on Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Subjects: Predictions and Analysis Using Acoustic Models , 2005, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[23]  Audio-visual consonant recognition with the 3M/House cochlear implant. , 1990, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[24]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[25]  M W Skinner,et al.  Identification of speech by cochlear implant recipients with the multipeak (MPEAK) and spectral peak (SPEAK) speech coding strategies II. Consonants. , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[26]  Philipos C Loizou,et al.  Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants. , 2006, Advances in oto-rhino-laryngology.

[27]  Kerrie L Plant,et al.  Parameter selection and programming recommendations for the ACE and CIS speech-processing strategies in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system , 2002, Cochlear implants international.

[28]  David L Woods,et al.  Consonant identification in consonant-vowel-consonant syllables in speech-spectrum noise. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  M F Dorman,et al.  Acoustic cues for consonant identification by patients who use the Ineraid cochlear implant. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Mario A Svirsky,et al.  A mathematical model of medial consonant identification by cochlear implant users. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Benjamin Munson,et al.  Patterns of phoneme perception errors by listeners with cochlear implants as a function of overall speech perception ability. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  Carl Verschuur Modeling the effect of channel number and interaction on consonant recognition in a cochlear implant peak-picking strategy. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  Van Zyl,et al.  Objective determination of vowel intelligibility of a cochlear implant model , 2009 .

[34]  Ning Zhou,et al.  The effects of frequency-place shift on consonant confusion in cochlear implant simulations. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  The mathematical theory of communication , 1950 .

[36]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Temporal cues for consonant recognition: training, talker generalization, and use in evaluation of cochlear implants. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Gunnar Fant,et al.  Speech sounds and features , 1973 .

[38]  K. Plant,et al.  Speech Perception as a Function of Electrical Stimulation Rate: Using the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant System , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[39]  Robert V. Shannon,et al.  Effect of Stimulation Rate on Cochlear Implant Users’ Phoneme, Word and Sentence Recognition in Quiet and in Noise , 2010, Audiology and Neurotology.

[40]  M W Skinner,et al.  Identification of Speech by Cochlear Implant Recipients with the Multipeak (MPEAK) and Spectral Peak (SPEAK) Speech Coding Strategies I. Vowels , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[41]  Robert V Shannon,et al.  Effects of Stimulation Rate on Speech Recognition with Cochlear Implants , 2005, Audiology and Neurotology.

[42]  Peter Ladefoged,et al.  Phonetic features and phonological features , 1973 .

[43]  R V Shannon,et al.  Consonant recordings for speech testing. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

[45]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[46]  Bryan E Pfingst,et al.  Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  Jont B. Allen Consonant recognition and the articulation index. , 2005, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[48]  R. Shrivastav,et al.  Speech based optimization of cochlear implants , 2012, International journal of audiology.

[49]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[50]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Lexico-semantic and acoustic-phonetic processes in the perception of noise-vocoded speech: implications for cochlear implantation , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..