Minimum spectral contrast needed for vowel identification by normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners.

The minimum spectral contrast needed for vowel identification by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners was determined in this study. In experiment 1, a spectral modification algorithm was used that manipulated the channel amplitudes extracted from a 6-channel continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) processor to have a 1-10 dB spectral contrast. The spectrally modified amplitudes of eight natural vowels were presented to six Med-EI/CIS-link users for identification. Results showed that subjects required a 4-6 dB contrast to identify vowels with relatively high accuracy. A 4-6 dB contrast was needed independent of the individual subject's dynamic range (range 9-28 dB). Some cochlear implant (CI) users obtained significantly higher scores with vowels enhanced to 6 dB contrast compared to the original, unenhanced vowels, suggesting that spectral contrast enhancement can improve the vowel identification scores for some CI users. To determine whether the minimum spectral contrast needed for vowel identification was dependent on spectral resolution (number of channels available), vowels were processed in experiment 2 through n (n =4, 6, 8, 12) channels, and synthesized as a linear combination of n sine waves with amplitudes manipulated to have a 1-20 dB spectral contrast. For vowels processed through 4 channels, normal-hearing listeners needed a 6 dB contrast, for 6 and 8 channels a 4 dB contrast was needed, consistent with our findings with CI listeners, and for 12 channels a 1 dB contrast was sufficient to achieve high accuracy (>80%). The above-mentioned findings with normal-hearing listeners suggest that when the spectral resolution is poor, a larger spectral contrast is needed for vowel identification. Conversely, when the spectral resolution is fine, a small spectral contrast (1 dB) is sufficient. The high identification score (82%) achieved with 1 dB contrast was significantly higher than any of the scores reported in the literature using synthetic vowels, and this can be attributed to the fact that we used natural vowels which contained duration and spectral cues (e.g., formant movements) present in fluent speech. The outcomes of experiments 1 and 2, taken together, suggest that CI listeners need a larger spectral contrast (4-6 dB) than normal-hearing listeners to achieve high recognition accuracy, not because of the limited dynamic range, but because of the limited spectral resolution.

Speech recognition by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners as a function of intensity resolution.

The importance of intensity resolution in terms of the number of intensity steps needed for speech recognition was assessed for normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners. In experiment 1, the channel amplitudes extracted from a six-channel continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) processor were quantized into 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32 steps. Consonant recognition was assessed for five cochlear implant listeners, using the Med-El/CIS-link device, as a function of the number of steps in the electrical dynamic range. Results showed that eight steps within the dynamic range are sufficient for reaching asymptotic performance in consonant recognition. These results suggest that amplitude resolution is not a major factor in determining consonant identification. In experiment 2, the relationship between spectral resolution (number of channels) and intensity resolution (number of steps) in normal-hearing listeners was investigated. Speech was filtered through 4-20 frequency bands, synthesized as a linear combination of sine waves with amplitudes extracted from the envelopes of the bandpassed waveforms, and then quantized into 2-32 levels to produce stimuli with varying degrees of intensity resolution. Results showed that the number of steps needed to achieve asymptotic performance was a function of the number of channels and the speech material used. For vowels, asymptotic performance was obtained with four steps, while for consonants, eight steps were needed for most channel conditions, consistent with our findings in experiment 1. For sentences processed though 4 channels, 16 steps were needed to reach asymptotic performance, while for sentences processed through 16 channels, 4 steps were needed. The results with normal-hearing listeners on sentence recognition point to an inverse relationship between spectral resolution and intensity resolution. When spectral resolution is poor (i.e., a small number of channels is available) a relatively fine intensity resolution is needed to achieve high levels of understanding. Conversely, when the intensity resolution is poor, a high degree of spectral resolution is needed to achieve asymptotic performance. The results of this study, taken together with previous findings on the effect of reduced dynamic range, suggest that the performance of cochlear implant subjects is primarily limited by the small number (four to six) of channels received, and not by the small number of intensity steps or reduced dynamic range.

The effect of parametric variations of cochlear implant processors on speech understanding.

This study investigated the effect of five speech processing parameters, currently employed in cochlear implant processors, on speech understanding. Experiment 1 examined speech recognition as a function of stimulation rate in six Med-E1/CIS-Link cochlear implant listeners. Results showed that higher stimulation rates (2100 pulses/s) produced a significantly higher performance on word and consonant recognition than lower stimulation rates (<800 pulses/s). The effect of stimulation rate on consonant recognition was highly dependent on the vowel context. The largest benefit was noted for consonants in the /uCu/ and /iCi/ contexts, while the smallest benefit was noted for consonants in the /aCa/ context. This finding suggests that the /aCa/ consonant test, which is widely used today, is not sensitive enough to parametric variations of implant processors. Experiment 2 examined vowel and consonant recognition as a function of pulse width for low-rate (400 and 800 pps) implementations of the CIS strategy. For the 400-pps condition, wider pulse widths (208 micros/phase) produced significantly higher performance on consonant recognition than shorter pulse widths (40 micros/phase). Experiments 3-5 examined vowel and consonant recognition as a function of the filter overlap in the analysis filters, shape of the amplitude mapping function, and signal bandwidth. Results showed that the amount of filter overlap (ranging from -20 to -60 dB/oct) and the signal bandwidth (ranging from 6.7 to 9.9 kHz) had no effect on phoneme recognition. The shape of the amplitude mapping functions (ranging from strongly compressive to weakly compressive) had only a minor effect on performance, with the lowest performance obtained for nearly linear mapping functions. Of the five speech processing parameters examined in this study, the pulse rate and the pulse width had the largest (positive) effect on speech recognition. For a fixed pulse width, higher rates (2100 pps) of stimulation provided a significantly better performance on word recognition than lower rates (<800 pps) of stimulation. High performance was also achieved by jointly varying the pulse rate and pulse width. The above results indicate that audiologists can optimize the implant listener's performance either by increasing the pulse rate or by jointly varying the pulse rate and pulse width.