An Auditory-Masking-Threshold-Based Noise Suppression Algorithm GMMSE-AMT[ERB] for Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Natarajan, Ajay; Hansen, John H. L.; Arehart, Kathryn H.; Rossi‐Katz, Jessica

doi:10.1155/asp.2005.2938

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results of the K-CAMP test suggest that the DNR-off condition would be more beneficial for specific pitch discrimination than the DNR-on condition. Considering that the benefit of DNR would be limited when both the signal and noise were spectrally and temporally overlapped [ 2 , 25 , 26 ], the type of stimulus and background noise could substantially affect the results. This study presented 8-talker babble noises as background noise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Digital Noise Reduction of Hearing Aids on Music and Speech Perception

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: Although many studies have evaluated the effect of the digital noise reduction (DNR) algorithm of hearing aids (HAs) on speech recognition, there are few studies on the effect of DNR on music perception. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effect of DNR on music, in addition to speech perception, using objective and subjective measurements. Subjects and Methods: Sixteen HA users participated in this study (58.00±10.44 years; 3 males and 13 females). The objective assessment of speech and music perception was based on the Korean version of the Clinical Assessment of Music Perception test and word and sentence recognition scores. Meanwhile, for the subjective assessment, the quality rating of speech and music as well as self-reported HA benefits were evaluated. Results: There was no improvement conferred with DNR of HAs on the objective assessment tests of speech and music perception. The pitch discrimination at 262 Hz in the DNR-off condition was better than that in the unaided condition (<i>p</i>=0.024); however, the unaided condition and the DNR-on conditions did not differ. In the Korean music background questionnaire, responses regarding ease of communication were better in the DNR-on condition than in the DNR-off condition (<i>p</i>=0.029). Conclusions: Speech and music perception or sound quality did not improve with the activation of DNR. However, DNR positively influenced the listener’s subjective listening comfort. The DNR-off condition in HAs may be beneficial for pitch discrimination at some frequencies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Digital Noise Reduction of Hearing Aids on Music and Speech Perception

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the current study, SNRs of 0 and +5 dB were selected to represent realistic listening conditions. White noise was used in this study because previous studies have shown that DNR may not be activated when speech-shaped noise is used due to the spectral similarity between signal and noise (Alcantara et al 2003; Natarajan et al 2005; Bentler et al 2008). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listening Effort and Perceived Clarity for Normal-Hearing Children With the Use of Digital Noise Reduction

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The goal of this study was to evaluate how digital noise reduction (DNR) impacts listening effort and judgment of sound clarity in children with normal hearing. It was hypothesized that, when two DNR algorithms differing in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) output are compared, the algorithm which provides the greatest improvement in overall output SNR will reduce listening effort and receive a better clarity rating from child listeners. A secondary goal was to evaluate the relation between the inversion method measurements and listening effort with DNR processing. Design Twenty-four children with normal hearing (ages 7-12 years) participated in a speech recognition task in which consonant-vowel-consonant nonwords were presented in broadband background noise. Test stimuli were recorded through two hearing aids with DNR-off and DNR-on at 0 dB and +5 dB input SNR. Stimuli were presented to listeners and verbal response time (VRT) and phoneme recognition scores were measured. The underlying assumption was that an increase in VRT reflects an in increase in listening effort. Children rated the sound clarity for each condition. The two commercially available HAs were chosen based on: 1) an inversion technique which was used to quantify the magnitude of change in SNR with the activation of DNR, and 2) a measure of magnitude-squared coherence which was used to ensure that DNR in both devices preserved the spectrum. Results One device provided a greater improvement in overall output SNR than the other. Both DNR algorithms resulted in minimal spectral distortion as measured using coherence. For both devices, VRT decreased for the DNR-on condition suggesting that listening effort decreased with DNR in both devices. Clarity ratings were also better in the DNR-on condition for both devices. The device showing the greatest improvement in output SNR with DNR engaged improved phoneme recognition scores. The magnitude of this improved phoneme recognition was not accurately predicted with measurements of output SNR. Measured output SNR varied in the ability to predict other outcomes. Conclusions Overall, results suggest that DNR effectively reduces listening effort and improves subjective clarity ratings in children with normal hearing but that these improvements are not necessarily related to the output SNR improvements or preserved speech spectra provided by the DNR.

show abstract

“…Studies with adults have shown significant improvements in speech perception when the noise is restricted to a narrow frequency region (Van Dijkhuizen et al 1991; Rankovic et al 1992). When the long-term spectra of the target signal and noise are similar, most studies have failed to show improvements in speech perception (Levitt et al1993; Boymans and Dreschler 2000; Alcantara et al 2003; Natarajan et al 2005; Bentler et al 2008). Kates (2008) reported that, in cases where speech and noise overlap in frequency, speech is likely to be attenuated by spectral subtraction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Digital Noise Reduction on Speech Perception for Children with Hearing Loss

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-While numerous studies have investigated the effects of single-microphone digital noise reduction algorithms for adults with hearing loss, similar studies have not been conducted with young hearing-impaired children. The goal of this study was to examine the effects of a commonlyused digital noise reduction scheme (spectral subtraction) in children with mild-moderately severe sensorineural hearing losses. It was hypothesized that the process of spectral subtraction may alter or degrade speech signals in some way. Such degradation may have little influence on the perception of speech by hearing-impaired adults who are likely to use contextual information under such circumstances. For young children who are still developing various language skills, however, signal degradation may have a more detrimental effect on the perception of speech.Design-Sixteen children (eight 5-7 year olds and eight 8-10 year olds) with mild-moderately severe hearing loss participated in this study. All participants wore binaural behind-the-ear hearing aids where noise reduction processing was performed independently in 16 bands with center frequencies spaced 500 Hz apart up to 7500 Hz. Test stimuli were nonsense syllables, words, and sentences in a background of noise. For all stimuli, data were obtained with noise reduction on and off.Results-In general, performance improved as a function of SNR for all three speech materials. The main effect for stimulus type was significant and post hoc comparisons of stimulus type indicated Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. 5 In previous studies, we have found that young children will occasionally respond with a phoneme that is not part of the stimulus set.To document these instances, we elected to include an "other" category. In the analysis of both overall performance and phonetic features "other" responses were assumed to be incorrect. NIH Public AccessAuthor Manuscript Ear Hear. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 June 1. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript that speech recognition was higher for sentences than for both nonsense syllables and words, but no significant differences were observed between nonsense syllables and words. The main effect for noise reduction and the two-way interaction between noise reduction and stimulus type were not significant. Significant age group effects were observed, but the two-way interaction between NR and age group was not significant.Conclusions-Consistent with previous findings from studies with adults, results suggest that the form of noise r...

show abstract

An Auditory-Masking-Threshold-Based Noise Suppression Algorithm GMMSE-AMT[ERB] for Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Effect of Digital Noise Reduction of Hearing Aids on Music and Speech Perception

Effect of Digital Noise Reduction of Hearing Aids on Music and Speech Perception

Listening Effort and Perceived Clarity for Normal-Hearing Children With the Use of Digital Noise Reduction

Effects of Digital Noise Reduction on Speech Perception for Children with Hearing Loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About