title: Objective speech intelligibility measurement for cochlear implant users in complex listening environments.
abstract: Objective intelligibility measurement allows for reliable, low-cost, and repeatable assessment of innovative speech processing technologies, thus dispensing costly and time-consuming subjective tests. To date, existing objective measures have focused on normal hearing model, and limited use has been found for restorative hearing instruments such as cochlear implants (CIs). In this paper, we have evaluated the performance of five existing objective measures, as well as proposed two refinements to one particular measure to better emulate CI hearing, under complex listening conditions involving noise-only, reverberation-only, and noise-plus-reverberation. Performance is assessed against subjectively rated data. Experimental results show that the proposed CI-inspired objective measures outperformed all existing measures; gains by as much as 22% could be achieved in rank correlation.
authors: Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique (INRS-EMT), Montreal, QC, Canada.
authors: João F
authors: JF
authors: Santos
authors: Stefano
authors: S
authors: Cosentino
authors: Oldooz
authors: O
authors: Hazrati
authors: Philipos C
authors: PC
authors: Loizou
authors: Tiago H
authors: TH
authors: Falk
keywords: Cochlear implants; Intelligibility; Noise; Objective metrics; Reverberation
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Mar;117(3 Pt 1):1001-4
references: 15806989
references: Hear Res. 2010 Oct 1;269(1-2):162-8
references: 20603206
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Dec;116(6):3679-89
references: 15658718
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Sep;130(3):1099-102
references: 21895052
references: J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2008 Dec;9(4):399-406
references: 18855069
references: Ear Hear. 2011 Sep-Oct;32(5):569-72
references: 21422928
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 May;129(5):3221-32
references: 21568424
references: J Speech Hear Res. 1986 Jun;29(2):146-54
references: 3724108
references: Ear Hear. 2000 Dec;21(6):608-24
references: 11132787
references: Hear Res. 1990 Aug 1;47(1-2):103-38
references: 2228789
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Mar;119(3):1606-15
references: 16583905
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Jan;125(1):360-71
references: 19173423
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Oct;102(4):2403-11
references: 9348698
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Nov;118(5):2791-3
references: 16334894
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2000 Sep;108(3 Pt 1):1181-96
references: 11008819
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Jul;114(1):446-54
references: 12880055
references: Biomed Signal Process Control. 2013 May;8(3):311-314
references: 23710246
references: Ear Hear. 2010 Jun;31(3):336-44
references: 20215967
references: Ear Hear. 2011 May-Jun;32(3):331-8
references: 21206363
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 May;125(5):3387-405
references: 19425678
references: Hear Res. 2008 Aug;242(1-2):132-40
references: 18249077
references: Hear Res. 2008 Aug;242(1-2):3-21
references: 18616994
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 1996 Sep;100(3):1703-16
references: 8817896
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 1989 Oct;86(4):1259-65
references: 2808901
references: Int J Audiol. 2012 Jun;51(6):437-43
references: 22356300