Localization and Speech-in-Noise Performance in a Virtual Reality Test Environment: A Pilot Study of Adults With Single-Sided Deafness Using a Cochlear Implant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this exploratory study was to (a) construct a virtual reality (VR) test environment to measure speech recognition in noise (SIN) and localization, and (b) use the VR test environment to establish degree of binaural hearing benefit among a small number of adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) using a cochlear implant (CI). METHOD: This pilot study included five adults implanted for SSD. The test environment was composed of an eight-speaker array that delivered restaurant noise and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers sentences. VR head-mounted display goggles delivered a video recording of a busy restaurant. Participants completed SIN and localization in two conditions: (a) normal-hearing ear and a CI on the contralateral SSD side (CI-ON) and (b) normal-hearing ear and unaided on the contralateral SSD side (CI-OFF). RESULTS: Overall, CI benefits for SIN and localization within the VR test environment were improved for some participants, although not all. CI benefit for SIN and localization was dependent on speaker location. CONCLUSIONS: VR test environments present new opportunities for studying SIN and localization abilities in participants with CIs. This pilot study shows that, within a VR test environment, degree of CI benefit among SSD participants for SIN and localization varies across speaker location and across participants.
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".