Zoom out Search Issue

IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE [124] MARCH 2015
strategies and the evaluation of signal processing algorithms with
the goal of improving speech intelligibility and sound quality. She
teaches courses in hearing science and audiology and is a certified
clinical audiologist.
Oldooz Hazrati ([e-mail]) received the
B.S.E.E. and M.S.E.E. degrees from Amirkabir University of
Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), in 2005 and 2008, respec-
tively. She received her Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) in 2012. Since
January 2013, she has been a research associate with the
Cochlear Implant and Speech Processing laboratories at UTD.
Her primary research interests include signal processing for
cochlear implants, speech dereverberation, and noise reduction.
She has authored/coauthored 27 journal articles and conference
papers in the field of signal processing for cochlear implants.
Rainer Huber ([e-mail]) received the diplo-
ma and Ph.D. degrees in physics from the Universität Oldenburg,
Germany, in 1998 and 2003, respectively. From 2001 to 2005, he
was a research associate at the Medical Physics section at the
Universität Oldenburg. Since 2005, he has been with HörTech
(National Center of Competence for Hearing Aid System
Technology) in Oldenburg, where he coleads the research and
development section. His own research is concerned with develop-
ment of objective sound quality models for normal hearing and
hearing impaired listeners.
James M. Kates ([e-mail]) received B.S.
and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1971 and the
professional degree of electrical engineer from MIT in 1972.
He retired in 2012 from hearing-aid manufacturer GN
ReSound, where he held the position of research fellow. He is
now a professor of hearing engineering research practice in
the Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences at
the University of Colorado at Boulder. His research interest is
signal processing for hearing aids with a focus on predicting
speech intelligibility and speech and music quality. He is a
Senior Member of the IEEE, a fellow of the Acoustical Society
of America, and a fellow of the Audio Engineering Society.
Susan Scollie ([e-mail]) is an associate profes-
sor at the National Centre for Audiology, University of Western
Ontario, in London, Canada. With colleagues, she developed
version 5.0 of the DSL method for hearing aid fitting. Her cur-
rent research focuses on the evaluation of DSL5, frequency
compression signal processing, and outcomes for infants and
children who use hearing aids.
REFERENCES
[1] O. Hazrati and P. C. Loizou, “The combined effects of reverberation and noise
on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners,” Int. J. Audiol., vol. 51,
no. 6, pp. 437–443, June 2012.
[2] S. Moller, W. Y. Chan, N. Cote, T. H. Falk, A. Raake, and M. Waltermann,
“Speech quality estimation: Models and trends,” IEEE Signal Processing Mag.,
vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 18–28, 2011.
[3] J. Santos, S. Cosentino, O. Hazrati, P. C. Loizou, and T. H. Falk, “Performance
comparison of intrusive objective speech intelligibility and quality metrics for co-
chlear implant users,” in Proc. InterSpeech, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 1724–1727.
[4] F. Chen and P. C. Loizou, “Predicting the intelligibility of vocoded speech,” Ear
Hear., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 331–338, 2011.
[5] R. Goldsworthy and J. Greenberg, “Analysis of speech-based speech transmis-
sion index methods with implications for nonlinear operations,” J. Acoust. Soc.
Am., vol. 116, no. 6, pp. 3679–3689, 2004.
[6] I. Holube and B. Kollmeier, “Speech intelligibility prediction in hearing-
impaired listeners based on a psychoacoustically motivated perception model,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 1703–1716, 1996.
[7] ANSI S3.5-1997, “Methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility in-
dex,” ANSI, Tech. Rep., 1997.
[8] C. H. Taal, R. C. Hendriks, R. Heusdens, and J. Jensen, “An algorithm for intel-
ligibility prediction of time–frequency weighted noisy speech,” IEEE Trans. Audio,
Speech, Lang. Process., vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 2125–2136, 2011.
[9] C. H. Taal, R. Hendriks, and R. Heusdens, “Matching pursuit for channel selec-
tion in cochlear implants based on an intelligibility metric,” in Proc. 20th IEEE
European Signal Processing Conf. (EUSIPCO), 2012, pp. 504–508.
[10] ITU-T Rec. P.862, “Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ): An objec-
tive method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrow-band telephone
networks and speech codecs,” International Telecommunications Union, Geneva,
Switzerland, Feb. 2001.
[11] ITU-T Rec. P.862.2, “Wideband extension to recommendation p.862 for the
assessment of wideband telephone networks and speech codecs,” International
Telecommunications Union, Geneva, Switzerland, Nov. 2007.
[12] J. M. Kates and K. H. Arehart, “The hearing-aid speech quality index
(HASQI),” J. Audio Eng. Soc., vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 363–381, 2010.
[13] J. Kates, “An auditory model for intelligibility and quality predictions,” in
Proc. Meetings Acoustics, vol. 19, no. 050184, 2013, pp. 1–9.
[14] J. Kates and K. Arehart, “The hearing aid speech perception index (HASPI),”
Speech Commun.
, vol. 65, pp. 75–93, Nov./Dec. 2014.
[15] J. M. Kates and K. H. Arehart, “The hearing-aid speech quality index (HASQI)
version 2,” J. Audio Eng. Soc., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 99–117, 2014.
[16] R. Huber and B. Kollmeier, “PEMO-Q: A new method for objective audio qual-
ity assessment using a model of auditory perception,” IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech,
Lang. Process., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1902–1911, 2006.
[17]S.Goetze,E.Albertin,M.Kallinger,A.Mertins, and K.-D.Kammeyer,
“Quality assessment for listening-room compensation algorithms,” in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing, 2010, pp. 2450–2453.
[18] R. Huber, V. Parsa, and S. Scollie, “Predicting the perceived sound quality of
frequency-compressed speech,” PlosOne, to be published. DOI: 10.1371/journal.
pone.0110260
[19] R. P. Derleth, T. Dau, and B. Kollmeier, “Modeling temporal and compres-
sive properties of the normal and impaired auditory system,” Hear. Res., vol. 159,
no. 1, pp. 132–149, 2001.
[20] ITU-T P.563, “Single ended method for objective speech quality assessment in
narrow-band telephony applications,” International Telecommunications Union,
Geneva, Switzerland, May 2004.
[21] S. Cosentino, T. Marquardt, D. McAlpine, and T. Falk, “Towards objective
measures of speech intelligibility for cochlear implant users in reverberant envi-
ronments,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Information Science, Signal Processing and Ap-
plications, 2012, pp. 4710–4713.
[22] F. Chen, O. Hazrati, and P. C. Loizou, “Predicting the intelligibility of rever-
berant speech for cochlear implant listeners with a non-intrusive intelligibility
measure,” Biomed. Signal Process. Control, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 311–314, May 2013.
[23] T. Falk, C. Zheng, and W. Y. Chan, “A non-intrusive quality and intelligibility
measure of reverberant and dereverberated speech,” IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech,
Lang. Processing, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 1766–1774, Sept. 2010.
[24] S. D. Ewert and T. Dau, “Characterizing frequency selectivity for envelope
fluctuations,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 1181–1196, 2000.
[25] T. Falk and W. Chan, “Temporal dynamics for blind measurement of room
acoustical parameters,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Measure., vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 978–
989, 2010.
[26] J. F. Santos, S. Cosentino, O. Hazrati, P. C. Loizou, and T. H. Falk, “Objective
speech intelligibility measurement for cochlear implant users in complex listening
environments,” Speech Commun., vol. 55, no. 7–8, pp. 815 – 824, 2013.
[27] J. Santos and T. Falk, “Updating the SRMR-CI metric for improved intel-
ligibility prediction for cochlear implant users,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio, Speech,
Lang. Processing, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 2197–2206, Dec. 2014.
[28] D. Suelzle, V. Parsa, and T. H. Falk, “On a reference-free speech quality es-
timator for hearing aids,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 133, no. 5, pp. EL412–EL418,
2013.
[29] K. Kokkinakis, O.
Hazrati, and P. C. Loizou, “A channel-selection criterion
for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 129,
no. 5, pp. 3221–3232, 2011.
[30] V. Parsa, S. Scollie, D. Glista, and A. Seelisch, “Nonlinear frequency compres-
sion effects on sound quality ratings of speech and music,” Trends Amplification,
vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 54–68, 2013.
[31] ITU-T, “Statistical evaluation procedure for P.OLQA,” TD 12rev1 (WP 2/12),
Mar. 2009.
[SP]
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
q
q
M
M
q
q
M
M
q
M
THE WORLD’S NEWSSTAND
®
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
q
q
M
M
q
q
M
M
q
M
THE WORLD’S NEWSSTAND
®
____________
_________________
_______________
_________________