Acoustics Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wohllebengasse 12-14, A-1040 Vienna, Austria.
J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Feb;127(2):990-1001. doi: 10.1121/1.3283014.
Using a vocoder, median-plane sound localization performance was measured in eight normal-hearing listeners as a function of the number of spectral channels. The channels were contiguous and logarithmically spaced in the range from 0.3 to 16 kHz. Acutely testing vocoded stimuli showed significantly worse localization compared to noises and 100 pulses click trains, both of which were tested after feedback training. However, localization for the vocoded stimuli was better than chance. A second experiment was performed using two different 12-channel spacings for the vocoded stimuli, now including feedback training. One spacing was from experiment 1. The second spacing (called the speech-localization spacing) assigned more channels to the frequency range associated with speech. There was no significant difference in localization between the two spacings. However, even with training, localizing 12-channel vocoded stimuli remained worse than localizing virtual wideband noises by 4.8 degrees in local root-mean-square error and 5.2% in quadrant error rate. Speech understanding for the speech-localization spacing was not significantly different from that for a typical spacing used by cochlear-implant users. These experiments suggest that current cochlear implants have a sufficient number of spectral channels for some vertical-plane sound localization capabilities, albeit worse than normal-hearing listeners, without loss of speech understanding.
利用声码器,以频谱通道数量为函数,在 8 名正常听力的听众中测量了中平面声音定位性能。通道在 0.3 至 16 kHz 的范围内连续且对数间隔。急性测试声码化刺激与噪声和 100 脉冲 click 训练相比,定位性能明显较差,而这两者在反馈训练后都进行了测试。然而,声码化刺激的定位性能优于随机水平。第二个实验使用两种不同的声码化刺激 12 通道间距进行,现在包括反馈训练。一个间距来自实验 1。第二个间距(称为语音定位间距)将更多的通道分配到与语音相关的频率范围。在定位方面,两种间距之间没有显著差异。然而,即使经过训练,12 通道声码化刺激的定位仍比虚拟宽带噪声差 4.8 度,在均方根误差和象限误差率方面分别差 5.2%。语音定位间距的语音理解与人工耳蜗使用者常用的典型间距没有显著差异。这些实验表明,目前的人工耳蜗具有足够数量的频谱通道,可实现某些垂直平面声音定位能力,尽管不如正常听力者,但不会影响语音理解。