Ricketts Todd A, Henry Paula P, Hornsby Benjamin W Y
Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center for Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Ear Hear. 2005 Oct;26(5):473-86. doi: 10.1097/01.aud.0000179691.21547.01.
The purpose of the current investigation was to systematically examine two of the assumptions central to the application of Articulation Index weighted Directivity Index (AI-DI) to the prediction of directional benefit across three groups of listeners differentiated by degree and configuration of hearing loss. Specifically, the assumption that (1) changes in speech recognition performance are predictable from frequency specific changes in calculated audibility after applying directivity index (DI) values and (2) applying appropriate frequency importance functions would increase the accuracy of AI-DI predictions of directional benefit were evaluated.
The output of a single hearing aid for a speech in noise input was recorded to produce high and low directivity (directional and omnidirectional microphone modes) segments. These segments were then high-pass and low-pass filtered into low- and high-frequency regions and acoustically mixed to generate the eight frequency-specific directivity combinations. All recordings were made through an acoustic manikin placed in a single room, surrounded by five uncorrelated noise sources. The aided sentence recognition, in noise, for three groups of 12 adult participants with symmetrical sensorineural hearing impairment, was then measured across the eight listening conditions. The three groups were differentiated by degree and type of hearing loss including "sloping," "flat," and "severe" configurations. The frequency-specific DI values for each of the eight listening conditions were applied to the calculation of frequency specific noise levels. These corrected noise levels were then used to calculate an Articulation Index using the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII, ). These SII values were then compared with measured speech recognition under the same eight listening conditions. Directional benefit values were then calculated by subtracting the performance of individual participants on the Connected Speech Test (CST) in omnidirectional mode from performance in all other filter conditions. The changes in average DI and AI-DI (using three different frequency importance functions) that existed between omnidirectional and the other seven filter conditions were then calculated for comparison to directional benefit values.
The speech recognition data revealed a complex interaction between filter condition and group. Despite this interaction, highly significant positive correlations were found between participants' speech recognition scores and the corresponding SII calculation for all three hearing loss groups. Individual subjects' measured directional benefit was highly correlated with changes in DI. Similar correlations were found for average DI and all three AI-DI weighting methods.
As expected, performance and calculated SII values were in good agreement across conditions supporting the hypothesis that DI provides a reasonable frequency-specific estimate of signal-to-noise ratio changes in the test environment. The results further support the use of AI-DI or average DI for prediction of directional benefit. The choice of importance weighting across frequency (flat or frequency importance function based), however, did not improve the accuracy of these predictions; therefore, a simple average DI is advocated. Further, the prediction of absolute directional benefit across hearing loss groups from traditional AI-DI calculations may lead to error if the negative effects of hearing loss on speech understanding, and how these effects vary with degree of hearing loss, are not considered as a contributing factor.
本研究的目的是系统检验言语清晰度指数加权指向性指数(AI-DI)应用于预测三组听力损失程度和类型不同的听众的方向性益处时的两个核心假设。具体而言,评估以下假设:(1)在应用指向性指数(DI)值后,语音识别性能的变化可根据计算出的可听度的频率特异性变化预测;(2)应用适当的频率重要性函数会提高AI-DI对方向性益处预测的准确性。
记录单个助听器在噪声输入下的语音输出,以产生高指向性和低指向性(指向性和全向性麦克风模式)片段。然后将这些片段进行高通和低通滤波,分为低频和高频区域,并进行声学混合,以生成八个频率特异性指向性组合。所有录音均通过放置在单个房间中的声学模型进行,房间周围有五个不相关的噪声源。然后在八种聆听条件下测量三组各12名患有对称性感音神经性听力损失的成年参与者在噪声中的助听句子识别能力。这三组参与者根据听力损失的程度和类型进行区分,包括“斜坡型”、“平坦型”和“重度”配置。将八种聆听条件下每种条件的频率特异性DI值应用于频率特异性噪声水平的计算。然后使用言语可懂度指数(SII)根据这些校正后的噪声水平计算言语清晰度指数。然后将这些SII值与在相同的八种聆听条件下测量的语音识别结果进行比较。然后通过从全向模式下的连贯语音测试(CST)中个体参与者的表现中减去在所有其他滤波条件下的表现来计算方向性益处值。然后计算全向性和其他七种滤波条件之间存在且平均DI和AI-DI(使用三种不同的频率重要性函数)的变化,以便与方向性益处值进行比较。
语音识别数据显示了滤波条件和组别之间复杂的相互作用。尽管存在这种相互作用,但在所有三个听力损失组中,参与者的语音识别分数与相应的SII计算之间均发现了高度显著的正相关。个体受试者测量的方向性益处与DI的变化高度相关。平均DI和所有三种AI-DI加权方法也发现了类似的相关性。
正如预期的那样,在各种条件下,性能和计算出的SII值高度一致,这支持了DI为测试环境中信号与噪声比变化提供合理的频率特异性估计这一假设。结果进一步支持使用AI-DI或平均DI来预测方向性益处。然而,频率重要性加权的选择(基于平坦或频率重要性函数)并未提高这些预测的准确性;因此,提倡使用简单的平均DI。此外,如果不考虑听力损失对言语理解的负面影响以及这些影响如何随听力损失程度而变化作为一个影响因素,那么根据传统AI-DI计算对不同听力损失组的绝对方向性益处进行预测可能会导致误差。