Comparison between the equalization and cancellation model and state of the art beamforming techniques

This paper investigates the performance of a selection of state-of-the-art array signal-processing techniques for the purpose of predicting the binaural listening experiments from the equalization and cancellation (EC) paper by Durlach written in 1963. Two different array signal-processing techniques are analyzed, 1) filter and sum beamforming (FS), and 2) minimum variance distortionless response (MVDR) beamforming. The theoretical properties of these beamformers for the specific situation of prediction of binaural masking level differences are analyzed in conjunction with the EC model. Also, the performance of the different beamformers on the data sets in the Durlach paper from 1963 is compared to the EC model.

[1]  E. C. Cmm,et al.  on the Recognition of Speech, with , 2008 .

[2]  Colin Cherry,et al.  Contribution to a Study of the “Cocktail Party Problem” , 1960 .

[3]  W. K. Taylor,et al.  Some Further Experiments upon the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears , 1954 .

[4]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The role of head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  E. C. Cherry,et al.  Mechanism of Binaural Fusion in the Hearing of Speech , 1957 .

[6]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: effect of location and type of interferer. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Albert Alexander Gray.  Our Perception of the Direction of Sound. , .

[8]  Nathaniel I Durlach,et al.  Application of an extended equalization-cancellation model to speech intelligibility with spatially distributed maskers. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  L. Rayleigh,et al.  XII. On our perception of sound direction , 1907 .

[10]  Todd A Ricketts,et al.  Effects of Noise Source Configuration on Directional Benefit Using Symmetric and Asymmetric Directional Hearing Aid Fittings , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[11]  J. Capon,et al.  Multidimensional maximum-likelihood processing of a large aperture seismic array , 1967 .

[12]  N. Durlach.  Equalization and Cancellation Theory of Binaural Masking‐Level Differences , 1963 .

[13]  E. C. Cherry,et al.  “Human ‘Cross‐Correlator’”—A Technique for Measuring Certain Parameters of Speech Perception , 1956 .

[14]  R. Beutelmann,et al.  Prediction of speech intelligibility in spatial noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  W. E. Kock.  Binaural Localization and Masking , 1950 .

[16]  R. S. Peters.  The Role of the Head , 2015 .

[17]  D. M. Leakey,et al.  Influence of Noise upon the Equivalence of Intensity Differences and Small Time Delays in Two‐Loudspeaker Systems , 1957 .

[18]  N. I. Durlach.  Note on the Equalization and Cancellation Theory of Binaural Masking Level Differences , 1960 .