Comparison of adaptive noise reduction algorithms in dual microphone hearing aids

In this paper, a physical and perceptual evaluation of two adaptive noise reduction algorithms for dual-microphone hearing aids are described. This is the first comparison between a fixed directional microphone on the one hand, and an adaptive directional microphone and an adaptive beamformer on the other hand, all implemented in the same digital hearing aid. The adaptive directional microphone is state-of-the-art in most modern commercial hearing aids. The physical evaluation shows the importance of an individual calibration procedure for the performance of the noise reduction algorithms with two microphone hearing aids. The directivity index calculated in anechoic conditions and intelligibility-weighted polar diagrams measured in reverberant conditions show that all the noise reduction strategies yield an improved signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), but that the adaptive beamformer generally performs best. From the perceptual evaluation, it is demonstrated that the adaptive beamformer always performs best in single noise source scenarios. In a more complex noise scenario, there is still a SNR improvement with all the techniques, however the effect is the same for all the strategies.

[1]  P. Peterson,et al.  Intelligibility-weighted measures of speech-to-interference ratio and speech system performance. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Paula P. Henry,et al.  Evaluation of an adaptive, directional-microphone hearing aid: Evaluación de un auxiliar auditivo de micrófono direccional adaptable , 2002, International journal of audiology.

[3]  Patrick Mangan. Peterson.  Adaptive array processing for multiple microphone hearing aids , 1989 .

[4]  Fa-Long Luo,et al.  Adaptive null-forming scheme in digital hearing aids , 2002, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[5]  J Vanden Berghe,et al.  An adaptive noise canceller for hearing aids using two nearby microphones. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  D. Hinkle,et al.  Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[7]  T Houtgast,et al.  Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  Jan Wouters,et al.  Adaptive noise suppression for a dual-microphone hearing aid: Supresión adaptativa del ruido para un auxiliar auditivo con micrófono dual , 2002, International journal of audiology.

[9]  P M Zurek,et al.  Evaluation of an adaptive beamforming method for hearing aids. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[11]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[12]  S. Haykin,et al.  Adaptive Filter Theory , 1986 .

[13]  Fei Xie,et al.  A comparative study of speech detection methods , 1997, EUROSPEECH.

[14]  L. J. Griffiths,et al.  An alternative approach to linearly constrained adaptive beamforming , 1982 .

[15]  W. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[16]  T Ricketts,et al.  The Impact of Head Angle on Monaural and Binaural Performance with Directional and Omnidirectional Hearing Aids , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[17]  J Vanden Berghe,et al.  Speech Recognition in Noise for Cochlear Implantees with a Two-Microphone Monaural Adaptive Noise Reduction System , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[18]  W A Dreschler,et al.  Advantages of directional hearing aid microphones related to room acoustics. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[19]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  T Ricketts,et al.  Directivity Quantification in Hearing Aids: Fitting and Measurement Effects , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[21]  J. Proudfoot,et al.  Noise , 1931, The Indian medical gazette.

[22]  K. D. Kryter.  PROPOSED METHODS FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE ARTICULATION INDEX , 1961 .

[23]  Patrick M. Zurek,et al.  Microphone-array hearing aids with binaural output .I. Fixed-processing systems , 1997, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[24]  R. Plomp.  Noise, Amplification, and Compression: Considerations of Three Main Issues in Hearing Aid Design , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[25]  Marc Moonen,et al.  Noise Reduction Results of an Adaptive Filtering Technique for Dual-Microphone Behind-the-Ear Hearing Aids , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[26]  D B Hawkins,et al.  Signal-to-noise ratio advantage of binaural hearing aids and directional microphones under different levels of reverberation. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.