Speech quality evaluation of a sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm with normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.

Although there are numerous papers describing single-channel noise reduction strategies to improve speech perception in a noisy environment, few studies have comprehensively evaluated the effects of noise reduction algorithms on speech quality for hearing impaired (HI). A model-based sparse coding shrinkage (SCS) algorithm has been developed, and has shown previously (Sang et al., 2014) that it is as competitive as a state-of-the-art Wiener filter approach in speech intelligibility. Here, the analysis is extended to include subjective quality ratings and a method called Interpolated Paired Comparison Rating (IPCR) is adopted to quantitatively link the benefit of speech intelligibility and speech quality. The subjective quality tests are performed through IPCR to efficiently quantify noise reduction effects on speech quality. Objective measures including frequency-weighted segmental signal-to-noise ratio (fwsegSNR), perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ) and hearing aid speech quality index (HASQI) are adopted to predict the noise reduction effects. Results show little difference in speech quality between the SCS and the Wiener filter algorithm but a difference in quality rating between the HI and NH listeners. HI listeners generally gave better quality ratings of noise reduction algorithms than NH listeners. However, SCS reduced the noise more efficiently at the cost of higher distortions that were detected by NH but not by the HI. SCS is a promising candidate for noise reduction algorithms for HI. In general, care needs to be taken when adopting algorithms that were originally developed for NH participants into hearing aid applications. An algorithm that is evaluated negatively with NH might still bring benefits for HI participants.

Simultaneous suppression of tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emissions: Two and three-tone burst combinations.

Previous investigations have shown that components of a tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emission (TBOAE) evoked by a 1 kHz tone burst (TB1) can be suppressed by the simultaneous presence of a 2 kHz tone burst (TB2) or a pair of tone bursts at 2 and 3 kHz (TB2 and TB3 respectively). No previous study has measured this "simultaneous suppression of TBOAEs" for both TB2 alone and TB2 and TB3 from the same ears, so that the effect of the additional presence of TB3 on suppression caused by TB2 is not known. In simple terms, three outcomes are possible; suppression increases, suppression is reduced or suppression is not affected. Comparison of previously reported simultaneous suppression data suggests TB3 causes a reduction in suppression, though it is not clear if this is a genuine effect or simply reflects methodological and ear differences between studies. This issue has implications for previously proposed mechanisms of simultaneous suppression of TBOAEs and the interpretation of clinical data, and is clarified by the present study. Simultaneous suppression of TBOAEs was measured for TB1 and TB2 as well as TB1, TB2 and TB3 at 50, 60 and 70 dB p.e. SPL from nine normal human ears. Results showed no significant difference between mean suppression obtained for the two and three-tone burst combinations, indicating the reduction of suppression inferred from comparison of previous data is likely a result of methodological and ear differences rather than a genuine effect.

Further tests of the local nonlinear interaction-based mechanism for simultaneous suppression of tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emission (TBOAE) components measured in response to a 1 kHz tone burst (TB1) are suppressed by the simultaneous presence of an additional tone burst (TB2). This "simultaneous suppression of TBOAEs" has been explained in terms of a mechanism based on local nonlinear interactions between the basilar membrane (BM) travelling waves caused by TB1 and TB2. A test of this local nonlinear interaction (LNI)-based mechanism, as a function of the frequency separation (Δf, expressed in kHz) between TB1 and TB2, has previously been reported by Killan et al. (2012) using a simple mathematical model [Killan et al., Hear. Res. 285, 58-64 (2012)]. The two experiments described in this paper add additional data on the extent to which the LNI-based mechanism can account for simultaneous suppression, by testing two further hypotheses derived from the model predictions. Experiment I tested the hypothesis that TBOAE suppression is directly linked to TBOAE amplitude nonlinearity where ears that exhibit a higher degree of amplitude nonlinearity yield greater suppression than more linear ears, and this relationship varies systematically as a function of Δf. In order to test this hypothesis simultaneous suppression at a range of values of Δf at 60 dB peak-equivalent sound pressure level (p.e. SPL) and TBOAE amplitude nonlinearity from normal human ears was measured. In Experiment II the hypothesis that suppression will also increase progressively as a function of increasing tone burst level was tested by measuring suppression for a range of Δf and tone burst levels at 40, 50, 60 and 70 dB p.e. SPL. The majority of the findings from both experiments provide support for the LNI-based mechanism being primarily responsible for simultaneous suppression. However, some data were inconsistent with this view. Specifically, a breakdown in the relationship between suppression and TBOAE amplitude nonlinearity at Δf = 1 (i.e. when TB2 was reasonably well separated from, and had a higher frequency than TB1) and unexpected level-dependence, most notably at Δf = 1, but also where Δf = -0.5, was observed. Either the LNI model is too simple or an alternative explanation, involving response components generated at basal regions of the basilar membrane, is required to account for these findings.

Repeatability of click-evoked otoacoustic emission-based medial olivocochlear efferent assay.

OBJECTIVES: Otoacoustic emissions-based efferent assays are evolving to become a part of auditory diagnostics. The wide range of clinical applications, such as assessment of auditory neuropathy, auditory processing disorders, learning disability, monitoring success in auditory intervention and others illustrate the significance of this measurement. Defining the procedure's test-retest repeatability is of critical importance, to allow for distinction between measurement deviations and true physiological or pathological changes. The purpose of this study was to assess the repeatability of a click-evoked otoacoustic emission-based (CEOAE) test of the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex in normal-hearing (NH) adults. DESIGN: Test-retest data were collected from 35 NH young adults in two distinct test sessions separated by 1 to 4 days. CEOAEs were recorded without and with contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS; 35 dB SL). Three indices of the MOC reflex were computed: CAS-induced (a) absolute changes in CEOAE amplitude, (b) normalized changes in CEOAE amplitude, and (c) changes in CEOAE input-output functions. Repeatability of these indices was assessed by a three-layered approach, which consisted of Bland-Altman plots, coefficient of reliability (Cronbach's α), and analysis of variance. RESULTS: Analyses indicated good repeatability of three CEOAE-based MOC reflex indices. A two-way analysis of variance of the indices demonstrated no significant difference between test and retest. Normalized index showed similar repeatability as other indices. CEOAE signal to noise ratio did not seem to vary between test sessions. Notably, CAS caused a decrease in CEOAE input-output functions slope in a majority of participants (n = 29). CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first to elucidate the intrasubject variability of absolute and normalized indices of the MOC inhibitory effect. Although the measurements were conducted under realistic conditions resembling the clinical setting, repeatability was generally good in NH adults. For MOC reflex test, the signal to noise ratio of 6 dB for recording CEOAEs seems to be a recommendable criterion when considering practicability and measurement quality in clinical conditions. The present findings exemplify the suitability of CEOAE-based MOC assay as a monitoring tool of medial efferent status over time. The data are intended to assist clinicians and scientists alike in the accurate interpretation of CAS-induced CEOAE changes in the test-retest situation.

Evaluation of the preliminary auditory profile test battery in an international multi-centre study.

OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the composition and international multi-centre evaluation of a battery of tests termed the preliminary auditory profile. It includes measures of loudness perception, listening effort, speech perception, spectral and temporal resolution, spatial hearing, self-reported disability and handicap, and cognition. Clinical applicability and comparability across different centres are investigated. DESIGN: Headphone tests were conducted in five centres divided over four countries. Effects of test-retest, ear, and centre were investigated. Results for normally-hearing (NH) and hearing-impaired (HI) listeners are presented. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty NH listeners aged 19-39 years, and 72 HI listeners aged 22-91 years with a broad range of hearing losses were included. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was generally good and there were very few right/left ear effects. Results of all tests were comparable across centres for NH listeners after baseline correction to account for necessary differences between test materials. For HI listeners, results were comparable across centres for the language-independent tests. CONCLUSIONS: The auditory profile forms a clinical test battery that is applicable in four different languages. Even after baseline correction, differences between test materials have to be taken into account when interpreting results of language-dependent tests in HI listeners.

A mechanism for simultaneous suppression of tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Tone burst-evoked otoacoustic emission (TBOAE) components in response to a 1 kHz tone burst are suppressed by the simultaneous presence of tone bursts at higher frequencies. To date, the underlying cause of this "simultaneous suppression" of TBOAEs is unclear. This paper describes a potential mechanism based on local nonlinear interactions between basilar membrane (BM) travelling waves, and tests the extent to which it is able to account for this specific suppression phenomenon. A simple mathematical model based on local nonlinear interactions was developed, and its predictions for a range of tone burst pairs were compared to corresponding TBOAE suppression data recorded from fourteen normally hearing human ears at a level of 60 dB p.e. SPL. Model predictions and mean TBOAE suppression data showed close agreement for all pairs of tone bursts. These results suggest that simultaneous suppression of TBOAEs can be explained solely in terms of the local nonlinear interaction-based mechanism. However, the involvement of other mechanisms, involving components generated at places basal to their characteristic place along the BM, cannot be excluded.

Relationship between speech recognition in noise and sparseness.

OBJECTIVE: Established methods for predicting speech recognition in noise require knowledge of clean speech signals, placing limitations on their application. The study evaluates an alternative approach based on characteristics of noisy speech, specifically its sparseness as represented by the statistic kurtosis. DESIGN: Experiments 1 and 2 involved acoustic analysis of vowel-consonant-vowel (VCV) syllables in babble noise, comparing kurtosis, glimpsing areas, and extended speech intelligibility index (ESII) of noisy speech signals with one another and with pre-existing speech recognition scores. Experiment 3 manipulated kurtosis of VCV syllables and investigated effects on speech recognition scores in normal-hearing listeners. STUDY SAMPLE: Pre-existing speech recognition data for Experiments 1 and 2; seven normal-hearing participants for Experiment 3. RESULTS: Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that kurtosis calculated in the time-domain from noisy speech is highly correlated (r > 0.98) with established prediction models: glimpsing and ESII. All three measures predicted speech recognition scores well. The final experiment showed a clear monotonic relationship between speech recognition scores and kurtosis. CONCLUSIONS: Speech recognition performance in noise is closely related to the sparseness (kurtosis) of the noisy speech signal, at least for the types of speech and noise used here and for listeners with normal hearing.

Learning to discriminate interaural time differences: an exploratory study with amplitude-modulated stimuli.

The advent of bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) has increased interest in learning on binaural tasks, and studies in normal-hearing listeners provide important background information. However, few studies have considered learning with discrimination of interaural time difference (ITD). Here, learning with ITD was explored using stimuli that are more relevant to bilateral CIs than used previously. Inexperienced listeners were trained with envelope-based ITD using high-frequency amplitude-modulated tones with or without an interaural carrier frequency difference (IFD), the former to simulate asymmetrical bilateral CI insertions. All were tested with and without IFD before and after training. In most listeners, ITD thresholds improved substantially with training, not necessarily reaching asymptote after 3,000 trials. In these, the magnitude and time-course of learning was larger than anticipated from a previous study with low-frequency ITD. Learning generalized across IFD and the effect of IFD on ITD thresholds at post-test was smaller than reported previously. These results have implications for studies of bilateral CIs, such as the need to provide extensive training to avoid over-estimating any apparent 'impairment'.

The auditory middle latency response, evoked using maximum length sequences and chirps, as an indicator of adequacy of anesthesia.

The auditory evoked potential known as the middle latency response (MLR), evoked with regular click stimulation at around 5 Hz, has been suggested as an indicator of adequacy of anesthesia. The MLR is a very small signal embedded in high levels of background noise, so it can take a long time to acquire. However, using a stimulus paradigm of chirps presented in a maximum length sequence, the acquisition of the MLR can be improved compared to using conventional click stimulation. In this pilot study, we investigated this new technique in a clinical environment. Significant changes in MLR amplitude, but not latency, were measured for six of seven subjects in association with changes in responsiveness to command using the isolated forearm technique. The absence of any latency shift differs from other studies of the MLR during anesthesia and highlights the limited understanding of the relationship between anesthesia and the MLR.

Auditory localization abilities in bilateral cochlear implant recipients.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify binaural advantage for auditory localization in the horizontal plane by bilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Also, to determine whether the use of dual microphones with one implant improves localization. METHODS: Twenty subjects from the UK multicenter trial of bilateral cochlear implantation with Nucleus 24 K/M device were recruited. Sound localization was assessed in an anechoic room with an 11-loudspeaker array under four test conditions: right CI, left CI, binaural CI, and dual microphone. Two runs were undertaken for each of five stimuli (speech, tones, noise, transients, and reverberant speech). Order of conditions was counterbalanced across subjects. RESULTS: Mean localization error with bilateral implants was 24 degrees compared with 67 degrees for monaural implant and dual microphone conditions (chance performance is 65 degrees). Normal controls average 2 to 3 degrees in similar conditions. Binaural performance was significantly better than monaural performance for all subjects, for all stimulus types, and for different sound sources. Only small differences in performance with different stimuli were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral cochlear implantation with the Nucleus 24 device provides marked improvement in horizontal plane localization abilities compared with unilateral CI use for a range of stimuli having different spectral and temporal characteristics. Benefit was obtained by all subjects, for all stimulus types, and for all sound directions. However, binaural performance was still worse than that obtained by normal hearing listeners and hearing aid users with the same methodology. Monaural localization performance was at chance. There is no benefit for localization with dual microphones.

Transducer hysteresis contributes to "stimulus artifact" in the measurement of click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (L).

Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions from the human ear are typically several orders of magnitude smaller than the stimuli that elicit them--a measurement technique that attempts to cancel the stimulus signal from the recorded waveform is therefore typically employed. In practice, an imperfect cancellation of the stimulus is achieved, leaving a "stimulus artifact" that obscures the early part of the emission. Input-output nonlinearities of the transducers used in recording emissions are acknowledged as one source of the stimulus artifact. Here an additional source of this artifact, related to hysteresis in the magnetic "receivers" (loudspeakers) used in such recordings, is identified and discussed.

Methodology for quantifying perceptual effects from noise suppression systems.

Methodology is proposed for perceptual assessment of both subjective sound quality and speech recognition in such way that results can be compared between these two aspects. Validation is performed with a noise suppression system applied to hearing instruments. A method termed Interpolated Paired Comparison Rating (IPCR) was developed for time efficient assessment of subjective impression of different aspects of sound quality for a variety of noise conditions. The method is based on paired comparisons between processed and unprocessed stimuli, and the results are expressed as the difference in signal-to-noise ratio (dB) between these that give equal subjective impression. For tests of speech recognition in noise, validated adaptive test methods can be used that give results in terms of speech-to-noise ratio. The methodology was shown to be sensitive enough to detect significant mean differences between processed and unprocessed speech in noise, both regarding subjective sound quality and speech recognition ability in groups consisting of 30 subjects. An effect on sound quality from the noise suppression equivalent to about 3-4 dB is required to be statistically significant for a single subject. A corresponding effect of 3-6 dB is required for speech recognition (one-sided test). The magnitude of difference that occurred in the present study for sound quality was sufficient to show significant differences for sound quality within individuals, but this was not the case for speech recognition.

Relative benefits of linear analogue and advanced digital hearing aids.

Speech recognition performance and self-reported benefit from linear analogue and advanced (digital) hearing aids were compared in 100 first-time hearing aid users with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss fitted monaurally with a behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid in a single-blind randomized crossover trial. Subjects used each aid for 5 weeks in turn, with aid order balanced across subjects. Three alternative models of digital hearing aid were assigned to subjects according to a balanced design. Aid type was disguised to keep subjects blind within practical limitations. Aided speech recognition performance in noise was measured at speech levels of 65 and 75dB at a speech-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +2dB for closed sets of single words. Self-rated benefit was measured using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile (GHABP). Quality of life, hearing aid use and user preferences were also assessed. Speech recognition scores with the digital aids were significantly better at 75dB than with the analogue aids Self-reported benefit (APHAB, GHABP) and improvement in quality of life were generally not significantly different between analogue and digital aids, although aversiveness measured with the APHAB was significantly lower with digital aids, and satisfaction measured with the GHABP was greater. The digital aids were preferred significantly more often than the analogue aids, with 61 subjects choosing their digital aid, 26 choosing the analogue aid, and nine being equivocal. Overall, this study shows advantages for advanced digital over simple linear analogue aids in terms of both objective and subjective outcomes, although average differences are not large.