Cargando…
Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners
A comprehensive evaluation of eight signal pre-processing strategies, including directional microphones, coherence filters, single-channel noise reduction, binaural beamformers, and their combinations, was undertaken with normal-hearing (NH) and hearing-impaired (HI) listeners. Speech reception thre...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771033/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26721922 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2331216515618609 |
Sumario: | A comprehensive evaluation of eight signal pre-processing strategies, including directional microphones, coherence filters, single-channel noise reduction, binaural beamformers, and their combinations, was undertaken with normal-hearing (NH) and hearing-impaired (HI) listeners. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured in three noise scenarios (multitalker babble, cafeteria noise, and single competing talker). Predictions of three common instrumental measures were compared with the general perceptual benefit caused by the algorithms. The individual SRTs measured without pre-processing and individual benefits were objectively estimated using the binaural speech intelligibility model. Ten listeners with NH and 12 HI listeners participated. The participants varied in age and pure-tone threshold levels. Although HI listeners required a better signal-to-noise ratio to obtain 50% intelligibility than listeners with NH, no differences in SRT benefit from the different algorithms were found between the two groups. With the exception of single-channel noise reduction, all algorithms showed an improvement in SRT of between 2.1 dB (in cafeteria noise) and 4.8 dB (in single competing talker condition). Model predictions with binaural speech intelligibility model explained 83% of the measured variance of the individual SRTs in the no pre-processing condition. Regarding the benefit from the algorithms, the instrumental measures were not able to predict the perceptual data in all tested noise conditions. The comparable benefit observed for both groups suggests a possible application of noise reduction schemes for listeners with different hearing status. Although the model can predict the individual SRTs without pre-processing, further development is necessary to predict the benefits obtained from the algorithms at an individual level. |
---|