About: QUIET is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 646 publications have been published within this topic receiving 7223 citations. The topic is also known as: QUIET.
TL;DR: The nature of the acoustic changes that taken place when speakers produce speech under adverse conditions such as noise, psychological stress, or high cognitive load are discussed and the role of training and feedback in controlling and modifying a talker's speech to improve performance of current speech recognizers is discussed.
Abstract: Acoustical analyses were carried out on a set of utterances produced by two male speakers talking in quiet and in 80, 90, and 100 dB SPL of masking noise. In addition to replicating previous studies demonstrating increases in amplitude, duration, and vocal pitch while talking in noise, these analyses also found reliable differences in the formant frequencies and short‐term spectra of vowels. Perceptual experiments were also conducted to assess the intelligibility of utterances produced in quiet and in noise when they were presented at equal S/N ratios for identification. In each experiment, utterances originally produced in noise were found to be more intelligible than utterances produced in the quiet. The results of the acoustic analyses showed clear and consistent differences in the acoustic–phonetic characteristics of speech produced in quiet versus noisy environments. Moreover, these acoustic differences produced reliable effects on intelligibility. The findings are discussed in terms of: (1) the nature of the acoustic changes that take place when speakers produce speech under adverse conditions such as noise, psychological stress, or high cognitive load; (2) the role of training and feedback in controlling and modifying a talker’s speech to improve performance of current speech recognizers; and (3) the development of robust algorithms for recognition of speech in noise.
Abstract: * Acknowledgements * Introduction * Part 1: The Making of a Village * Part 2: Behind Bamboo Walls * Part 3: The Classes * Part 4: Who Works? Who Eats? * Part 5: Interventions
TL;DR: An up-to-date textbook of solar physics is presented in this paper, where the solar structure and processes are described along with the photosphere, the chromosphere, and the corona, as well as the strongest Fraunhofer lines, visible coronal lines, and coronal UV, XUV, and X-ray lines.
Abstract: An up-to-date textbook of solar physics is presented. The solar structure and processes, and the interior are described along with the photosphere, the chromosphere, and the corona. The strongest Fraunhofer lines, visible coronal lines, and coronal UV, XUV, and X-ray lines are listed.
TL;DR: Bilateral CIs were shown to be clearly superior over unilateral CIs for localization in quiet and in noisy situations, and an extension of the acoustic-dynamic range to higher levels would be beneficial.
Abstract: Objectives This study aimed to characterize horizontal plane sound localization in interfering noise at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and to compare performance across normal-hearing listeners and users of unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). CI users report difficulties with listening in noisy environments. Although their difficulties with speech understanding have been investigated in several studies, the ability to localize sounds in background noise has not extensively been examined, despite the benefits of binaural hearing being greatest in noisy situations. Sound localization is a measure of binaural processing and is thus well suited to assessing the benefit of bilateral implantation. The results will inform clinicians and implant manufacturers how to focus their efforts to improve localization with CIs in noisy situations. Design Six normal-hearing listeners, four unilateral, and 10 bilateral CI users indicated the perceived location of sound sources using a light pointer method. Target sounds were noise pulses played from one of 11 loudspeakers placed between -80 and +80 degrees in the frontal horizontal plane in the free field. Localization was assessed in quiet and in diffuse background noise at SNRs between +10 and -7 dB. Speech reception thresholds were measured and their relation to the localization results examined. Results Localization performance declined with decreasing SNR: target sounds were perceived closer to the median plane and the standard deviation of responses increased. Localization performance across groups was compared using a measure of "Spatial Resolvability" (SR). This measure gives the angular separation between two sound sources that would enable an ideal observer to correctly distinguish them 69.1% of the time. For all participants SR increased with decreasing SNR, that is, at low SNRs the spatial separation between sound sources remained distinguishable only when it was larger. Normal-hearing participants performed best, with SR between 1.4 and 5.1 degrees in quiet. Bilateral CI users showed SR between 8.3 and 43.6 degrees in quiet, corresponding approximately to the spatial resolution of normal-hearing listeners at an SNR of -5 dB. Most bilateral CI users had lost the ability to correctly determine which side the sound came from at an SNR of -3 dB. Overall, the SNR had to be at least +7 dB to achieve localization performance near to that in quiet for all bilateral CI users. No significant correlation was found between spatial resolution and speech reception thresholds, but the speech processor sensitivity setting did significantly affect performance. Unilateral CI users showed the most severe localization problems, with only two of four participants being able to correctly determine which side sounds came from in quiet. Conclusions This study is the first to examine sound localization with CIs at various SNRs and to compare it with normal hearing. The results confirm that localization with CIs is strongly disrupted in noisy situations. Bilateral CIs were shown to be clearly superior over unilateral CIs for localization in quiet and in noisy situations. With bilateral CIs, localization declined at moderately high absolute noise levels (>63 dB SPL), suggesting that an extension of the acoustic-dynamic range to higher levels would be beneficial. The absence of a relation between speech reception thresholds and spatial resolution highlights the need for additional clinical tests to assess the binaural benefit of a second implant.