Development and Evaluation of Single-Microphone Noise Reduction Algorithms for Digital Hearing Aids

Marzinzik, Mark; Kollmeier, Birger

doi:10.1142/9789812818140_0049

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The LES revealed improvements for algorithms, which did not give improved SRTs, analogous to the results of Marzinzik andWalden et al ͑2000͒. These researchers showed a significant positive effect of noise reduction algorithms on LES, although no improvement in speech intelligibility was shown by SRT tests.…”

Section: Comparison Of Srt Les and Prsupporting

confidence: 71%

Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids

Luts

Eneman

Wouters

et al. 2010

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

126

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the framework of the European HearCom project, promising signal enhancement algorithms were developed and evaluated for future use in hearing instruments. To assess the algorithms' performance, five of the algorithms were selected and implemented on a common real-time hardware/software platform. Four test centers in Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland perceptually evaluated the algorithms. Listening tests were performed with large numbers of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Three perceptual measures were used: speech reception threshold (SRT), listening effort scaling, and preference rating. Tests were carried out in two types of rooms. Speech was presented in multitalker babble arriving from one or three loudspeakers. In a pseudo-diffuse noise scenario, only one algorithm, the spatially preprocessed speech-distortion-weighted multi-channel Wiener filtering, provided a SRT improvement relative to the unprocessed condition. Despite the general lack of improvement in SRT, some algorithms were preferred over the unprocessed condition at all tested signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). These effects were found across different subject groups and test sites. The listening effort scores were less consistent over test sites. For the algorithms that did not affect speech intelligibility, a reduction in listening effort was observed at 0 dB SNR.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Srt Les and Prsupporting

confidence: 71%

Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids

Luts

Eneman

Wouters

et al. 2010

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

126

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding confirms that noise reduction appears to affect speech naturalness more at lower SNRs as was previously found for normal-hearing subjects. Neher, Grimm, and Hohmann (2014) also found that preference for noise reduction over no noise reduction was stronger at higher than at lower input SNRs. Boymans and Dreschler (2000) and Ricketts and Hornsby (2005) also found preference for noise reduction on over off at positive SNRs, in contrast to Alcántara et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Such a trade-off between preference and intelligibility was previously found to be inherent to noise reduction in several studies (Brons, Houben, & Dreschler, 2012; Neher et al., 2014; Wang, 2008). Apparently, due to the reduced noise level, it is more comfortable to listen to speech and noise that were processed with noise reduction, even though the reduction in speech level or distortions of the speech signal may cause lower intelligibility scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Effects of Noise Reduction on Speech Intelligibility, Perceived Listening Effort, and Personal Preference in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluates the perceptual effects of single-microphone noise reduction in hearing aids. Twenty subjects with moderate sensorineural hearing loss listened to speech in babble noise processed via noise reduction from three different linearly fitted hearing aids. Subjects performed (a) speech-intelligibility tests, (b) listening-effort ratings, and (c) paired-comparison ratings on noise annoyance, speech naturalness, and overall preference. The perceptual effects of noise reduction differ between hearing aids. The results agree well with those of normal-hearing listeners in a previous study. None of the noise-reduction algorithms improved speech intelligibility, but all reduced the annoyance of noise. The noise reduction that scored best with respect to noise annoyance and preference had the worst intelligibility scores. The trade-off between intelligibility and listening comfort shows that preference measurements might be useful in addition to intelligibility measurements in the selection of noise reduction. Additionally, this trade-off should be taken into consideration to create realistic expectations in hearing-aid users.

show abstract

“…An important difference between their and our experiment is that participants in our experiment were not asked to judge one sound sample on different aspects, but were asked to directly compare sound samples representing the different aspects. That means that for the interpretation of the results we do not have to take into account the subjective notion of “speech naturalness” which might very well be different amongst HI listeners ( Huber et al, 2018 ; Marzinzik, 2001 ). Therefore, we expect that in the current study differences between individuals in their distortion curve should be more directly linked to their distortion tolerance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Listener Preference for Strength of Single-Microphone Noise-Reduction; Trade-off Between Noise Tolerance and Signal Distortion Tolerance

Reinten

Ronde-Brons²,

Houben³

et al. 2023

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are large interindividual variations in preference for strength of noise-reduction (NR). It is hypothesized that each individual's tolerance for background noise on one hand and signal distortions on the other hand form this preference. We aim to visualize and analyze this so-called trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality. Dutch sentences in stationary background noise were processed with different NR strengths. We used an NR algorithm that allows us to separate the positive effects of NR (noise attenuation) from the negative effects (signal distortion). Stimuli consisted of speech in noise with different degrees of (1) background noise, (2) signal distortions, or (3) both (i.e., realistic NR at different NR strengths). With pairwise comparisons, participants chose which stimulus they preferred for prolonged listening. Twelve listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss participated in the study. For all participants, a trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality was found and visualized. The strength of preference was estimated with the Bradley–Terry–Luce choice model and was different for all individuals but in the same order of magnitude for distortion effects and noise effects. Strength of preference of realistic NR was smaller by a factor of ten. This study used a unique setup to capture the individual trade-off between noise attenuation and signal quality in NR. Disturbance from signal distortions is as important as disturbance from background noise for determining preference for NR strength. Individual listeners differ in their sensitivity to both factors and as a consequence in their preferred NR strength.

show abstract

Development and Evaluation of Single-Microphone Noise Reduction Algorithms for Digital Hearing Aids

Cited by 6 publications

References 2 publications

Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids

Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids

Effects of Noise Reduction on Speech Intelligibility, Perceived Listening Effort, and Personal Preference in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Individual Listener Preference for Strength of Single-Microphone Noise-Reduction; Trade-off Between Noise Tolerance and Signal Distortion Tolerance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About