Vocoder Simulations of Highly Focused Cochlear Stimulation With Limited Dynamic Range and Discriminable Steps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Objectives: There is recent interest in focused stimulation of the cochlea via modalities such as tripolar electrical and infrared neural stimulation to improve speech in noise comprehension and music perception. The purpose of this work was to use vocoder-based simulations to investigate speech recognition for broad stimulation (standard monopolar paradigm) versus more focused stimulation under a variety of signal-to-noise ratios, dynamic ranges, and numbers of discriminable loudness steps. Design: Vocoder simulations were used to assess the intelligibility of sentences, consonants, and vowels that were noise vocoded and presented to 7 normal-hearing listeners for identification. A novel aspect of the simulations presented here was the use of nonuniform quantization steps within the dynamic range to more closely simulate the Weber functions observed in cochlear implant users. Intelligibility was assessed for the different filter slopes under a variety of signal-to-noise ratio levels, dynamic ranges, and numbers of discriminable steps. Results: Speech processed via vocoder simulations representing focused stimulation was found to be substantially more intelligible than speech processed via a monopolar electric vocoder simulation, with differences of up to 60 percentage points. There were no significant differences, however, seen between the two focused approaches (signal attenuations of 10 and 17 dB/mm) for the conditions investigated. Speech processed via the highly focused vocoder (17 dB/mm) was robust to constraints on small envelope dynamic range and small number of discriminable steps within the dynamic range, as high performance was maintained with at least a 5 dB dynamic range and eight or more discriminable steps. Significant drops in intelligibility were noted when the number of steps fell below eight. Conclusions: Highly focused stimulation—tripolar electrical and infrared neural stimulation—has potential for increased performance in noise compared with monopolar stimulation, but much work remains to bear this potential out and to take full advantage of each modality’s strengths. Vocoder-based experiments investigated speech recognition for simulations of highly focused (representing tripolar electrical and infrared neural stimulation) versus broad stimulation of the cochlea. With filters of 2, 10, and 17 dB/mm excitation decay, the study examined effects of noise, dynamic range, and discriminable steps on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing listeners. The results indicate that the focused stimulation filters provide perceptual benefits, but filter slopes steeper than10 dB/mm did not improve performance for 1 mm channel spacing. For the 17 dB/mm attenuation, >80% recognition in quiet was maintained with at least 2 dB dynamic range and eight or more steps.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".