Improving virtual channel discrimination in a multi-channel context

[1]  H. Levitt.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Electrode ranking of "place pitch" and speech recognition in electrical hearing. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  H J McDermott,et al.  Evaluation of the Nucleus Spectra 22 processor and new speech processing strategy (SPEAK) in postlinguistically deafened adults. , 1995, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[4]  B M Clopton,et al.  Effects of electrical current configuration on potential fields in the electrically stimulated cochlea: field models and measurements. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[5]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues , 1995, Science.

[6]  L M Collins,et al.  Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  C S Throckmorton,et al.  Investigation of the effects of temporal and spatial interactions on speech-recognition skills in cochlear-implant subjects. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[10]  Jeroen J Briaire,et al.  Field patterns in a 3D tapered spiral model of the electrically stimulated cochlea , 2000, Hearing Research.

[11]  H J McDermott,et al.  The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  R. Shannon,et al.  Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  P C Loizou,et al.  Minimum spectral contrast needed for vowel identification by normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  John C Middlebrooks,et al.  Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: dependence on electrode configuration. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  Zachary M. Smith,et al.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception , 2002, Nature.

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

[17]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  The resolution of complex spectral patterns by cochlear implant and normal-hearing listeners. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  John C. Middlebrooks,et al.  Topographic Spread of Inferior Colliculus Activation in Response to Acoustic and Intracochlear Electric Stimulation , 2004, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[19]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Noise Susceptibility of Cochlear Implant Users: The Role of Spectral Resolution and Smearing , 2005, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[20]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  The number of spectral channels required for speech recognition depends on the difficulty of the listening situation. , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[21]  Gail S Donaldson,et al.  Place-pitch discrimination of single- versus dual-electrode stimuli by cochlear implant users (L). , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Voice gender identification by cochlear implant users: the role of spectral and temporal resolution. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[25]  Paul J Abbas,et al.  The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Spectral-Ripple Resolution Correlates with Speech Reception in Noise in Cochlear Implant Users , 2007, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[27]  Anthony J Spahr,et al.  Loudness growth observed under partially tripolar stimulation: model and data from cochlear implant listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  Anthony J Spahr,et al.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  Chris van den Honert,et al.  Focused intracochlear electric stimulation with phased array channels. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Mark Downing,et al.  Current Steering Creates Additional Pitch Percepts in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients , 2007, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[31]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Evaluation of the Harmony Soundprocessor in Combination With the Speech Coding Strategy HiRes 120 , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[32]  Joerg Pesch,et al.  Electrophysiological Spread of Excitation and Pitch Perception for Dual and Single Electrodes Using the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear Implant , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[33]  Lucas H M Mens,et al.  Current Steering and Current Focusing in Cochlear Implants: Comparison of Monopolar, Tripolar, and Virtual Channel Electrode Configurations , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[34]  Leonid M Litvak,et al.  Excitation Patterns of Simultaneous and Sequential Dual-Electrode Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Recipients , 2009, Ear and hearing.

[35]  David M. Landsberger,et al.  Virtual channel discrimination is improved by current focusing in cochlear implant recipients , 2009, Hearing Research.

[36]  Julie Arenberg Bierer,et al.  Identifying Cochlear Implant Channels with Poor Electrode-Neuron Interface: Partial Tripolar, Single-Channel Thresholds and Psychophysical Tuning Curves , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[37]  Dan Gnansia,et al.  Speech perception performance for 100 post-lingually deaf adults fitted with Neurelec cochlear implants: Comparison between Digisonic® Convex and Digisonic® SP devices after a 1-year follow-up , 2010, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[38]  Xin Luo,et al.  Encoding pitch contours using current steering. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  Leonid M Litvak,et al.  Use of “Phantom Electrode” Technique to Extend the Range of Pitches Available Through a Cochlear Implant , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[40]  Robert V. Shannon,et al.  Current focusing sharpens local peaks of excitation in cochlear implant stimulation , 2010, Hearing Research.

[41]  Gail S Donaldson,et al.  Within-Subjects Comparison of the HiRes and Fidelity120 Speech Processing Strategies: Speech Perception and Its Relation to Place-Pitch Sensitivity , 2011, Ear and hearing.

[42]  Monica Padilla,et al.  Reducing current spread using current focusing in cochlear implant users , 2012, Hearing Research.