Temporal coherence and attention in auditory scene analysis

Abstract

Humans and other animals can attend to one of multiple sounds, and follow it selectively over time. The neural underpinnings of this perceptual feat remain mysterious. Some studies have concluded that sounds are heard as separate streams when they activate well-separated populations of central auditory neurons, and that this process is largely pre-attentive. Here, we argue instead that stream formation depends primarily on temporal coherence between responses that encode various features of a sound source. Furthermore, we postulate that only when attention is directed towards a particular feature (e.g., pitch) do all other temporally coherent features of that source (e.g., timbre and location) become bound together as a stream that is segregated from the incoherent features of other sources. The auditory "scene analysis" problemHumans and other animals routinely detect, identify, and track sounds coming from a particular source (e.g., someone's voice, a conspecific call) amid sounds emanating from other sources (e.g., other voices, heterospecific calls, ambient music, or street traffic) ( Figure 1). The apparent ease with which they determine which components and attributes in a sound mixture arise from the same source belies the complexity of the underlying biological processes. By analogy with the "scene segmentation" problem in vision, this is referred to as the "auditory scene analysis" problem [1](Glossary) or, more colloquially, the "cocktail party" problem [2][3][4]. Understanding how the brain solves this problem is a fundamental challenge facing auditory scientists as it will shed light on the difficulties afflicting the hearing-impaired in multi-source environments [9], and give rise to more effective front-ends for auditory prostheses and automatic speech recognition [10].Recent studies have inspired numerous hypotheses and models concerning the neural underpinnings of perceptual organization in the central auditory system, and especially the auditory cortex (see [3,[7][8][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] for reviews). One prominent hypothesis that underlies most investigations is that sound elements segregate into separate "streams" whenever they activate well separated populations of auditory neurons that are selective to frequency or any other sound attributes that have been shown to support stream segregation (21-30). We shall © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Corresponding author: Shihab Shamma, Electrical and Computer Engineering and Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, Tel: 301-405-6842, sas@umd.edu. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errorsmaybe discovered which could affect the content, and ...

Analysis of Psychoacoustic and Vibration-Related Parameters to Track the Reasons for Health Complaints after the Introduction of New Tramways

“…Furthermore, changes in temporal and spectral signal features are other factors for an enhanced annoyance response found in laboratory and field studies [61][62][63]. These results are in compliance with neuro-biological and hearing research on the spectrotemporal filter mechanism of auditory attention [64][65][66][67]. If permanent changes of the temporal and frequency features occur the auditory system has difficulties to habituate and adapt-especially during nighttime.…”

Robust neuronal oscillatory entrainment to speech displays individual variation in lateralisation

“…To rise to the challenge of understanding speech perception, several theories have been proposed on the role of neural oscillations in speech perception (e.g. Ghitza, 2011;Ghitza & Greenberg, 2009;Giraud & Poeppel, 2012;Howard & Poeppel, 2010;Peelle, 2012;Poeppel, 2003;Shamma, Elhilali, & Micheyl, 2011). For instance, Giraud and Poeppel (2012) proposed that the spike train input to auditory cortex (which captures the energy fluctuations of the speech signal) influences neuronal excitability: the neurons in primary auditory cortex would adjust (reset) the phase of their excitability rhythm thereby allowing them to entrain to the rhythmic regularities of the speech signal.…”

Effects of Spectral Degradation on Attentional Modulation of Cortical Auditory Responses to Continuous Speech

“…We argue that high spectral resolution can support sound segregation and, as a result, selective attention can operate on the individually perceived auditory objects, enhancing the neural representation of the attended speech and suppressing the neural representation of unattended speech (Horton et al 2013;Kong et al 2014). The brain can do so by using temporal coherence to bind together acoustic features belonging to the same speech stream (Shamma et al 2011) or by predicting which moments contain more information about the attended speech than the competing speech (Schroeder et al 2008;Schroeder and Lakatos 2009;Zion-Golumbic et al 2013).…”