An algorithm that improves speech intelligibility in noise for normal-hearing listeners.

Traditional noise-suppression algorithms have been shown to improve speech quality, but not speech intelligibility. Motivated by prior intelligibility studies of speech synthesized using the ideal binary mask, an algorithm is proposed that decomposes the input signal into time-frequency (T-F) units and makes binary decisions, based on a Bayesian classifier, as to whether each T-F unit is dominated by the target or the masker. Speech corrupted at low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) levels (-5 and 0 dB) using different types of maskers is synthesized by this algorithm and presented to normal-hearing listeners for identification. Results indicated substantial improvements in intelligibility (over 60% points in -5 dB babble) over that attained by human listeners with unprocessed stimuli. The findings from this study suggest that algorithms that can estimate reliably the SNR in each T-F unit can improve speech intelligibility.

[1]  Pascal Scalart,et al.  Speech enhancement based on a priori signal to noise estimation , 1996, 1996 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing Conference Proceedings.

[2]  IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements , 1969, IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics.

[3]  Sadaoki Furui,et al.  Speaker-independent isolated word recognition using dynamic features of speech spectrum , 1986, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[4]  C Bürki-Oertle.  [The power of speech]. , 1988, Krankenpflege. Soins infirmiers.

[5]  Philipos C Loizou,et al.  Effect of spectral resolution on the intelligibility of ideal binary masked speech. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  B. Kollmeier,et al.  Speech enhancement based on physiological and psychoacoustical models of modulation perception and binaural interaction. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Herman J. M. Steeneken,et al.  Assessment for automatic speech recognition: II. NOISEX-92: A database and an experiment to study the effect of additive noise on speech recognition systems , 1993, Speech Commun..

[8]  Yi Hu,et al.  A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Y. Hu,et al.  TECHNIQUES FOR ESTIMATING THE IDEAL BINARY MASK , 2008 .

[10]  C. Schreiner,et al.  Periodicity coding in the inferior colliculus of the cat. I. Neuronal mechanisms. , 1988, Journal of neurophysiology.

[11]  Louis D. Braida,et al.  Human and machine consonant recognition , 2005, Speech Commun..

[12]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  SNR estimation based on amplitude modulation analysis with applications to noise suppression , 2003, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[13]  Arne Leijon,et al.  An efficient robust sound classification algorithm for hearing aids. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Hugh J. McDermott,et al.  The Design and Evaluation of a Hearing Aid with Trainable Amplification Parameters , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[15]  P. Loizou,et al.  Factors influencing intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech: implications for noise reduction. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Segregation of unvoiced speech from nonspeech interference. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Odette Scharenborg,et al.  Reaching over the gap: A review of efforts to link human and automatic speech recognition research , 2007, Speech Commun..

[18]  Yi Hu,et al.  Subjective comparison and evaluation of speech enhancement algorithms , 2007, Speech Commun..

[19]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modulations. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  Guy J. Brown,et al.  Computational Auditory Scene Analysis: Principles, Algorithms, and Applications , 2006 .

[21]  Ephraim.  Speech enhancement using a minimum mean square error short-time spectral amplitude estimator , 1984 .

[22]  Jae Lim,et al.  Evaluation of a correlation subtraction method for enhancing speech degraded by additive white noise , 1978 .

[23]  Philipos C. Loizou,et al.  Speech Enhancement: Theory and Practice , 2007 .

[24]  B. Moore.  An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1977 .

[25]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Monaural speech segregation based on pitch tracking and amplitude modulation , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks.

[26]  Richard M. Stern,et al.  A Bayesian classifier for spectrographic mask estimation for missing feature speech recognition , 2004, Speech Commun..

[27]  Douglas A. Reynolds,et al.  Speaker Verification Using Adapted Gaussian Mixture Models , 2000, Digit. Signal Process..

[28]  Douglas A. Reynolds,et al.  Robust text-independent speaker identification using Gaussian mixture speaker models , 1995, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[29]  Richard Lippmann,et al.  Speech recognition by machines and humans , 1997, Speech Commun..

[30]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .

[31]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[33]  Phil D. Green,et al.  Robust automatic speech recognition with missing and unreliable acoustic data , 2001, Speech Commun..