Interaural Fluctuations Research Articles

The effect of interaural fluctuation rate on correlation change discrimination.

While bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) provide some binaural benefits, these benefits are limited compared to those observed in normal-hearing (NH) listeners. The large frequency-to-electrode allocation bandwidths (BWs) in CIs compared to auditory filter BWs in NH listeners increases the interaural fluctuation rate available for binaural unmasking, which may limit binaural benefits. The purpose of this work was to investigate the effect of interaural fluctuation rate on correlation change discrimination and binaural masking-level differences in NH listeners presented a CI simulation using a pulsed-sine vocoder. In experiment 1, correlation-change just-noticeable differences (JNDs) and tone-in-noise thresholds were measured for narrowband noises with different BWs and center frequencies (CFs). The results suggest that the BW, CF, and/or interaural fluctuation rate are important factors for correlation change discrimination. In experiment 2, the interaural fluctuation rate was systematically varied and dissociated from changes in BW and CF by using a pulsed-sine vocoder. Results indicated that the interaural fluctuation rate did not affect correlation change JNDs for correlated reference noises; however, slow interaural fluctuations increased correlation change JNDs for uncorrelated reference noises. In experiment 3, the BW, CF, and vocoder pulse rate were varied while interaural fluctuation rate was held constant. JNDs increased for increasing BW and decreased for increasing CF. In summary, relatively fast interaural fluctuation rates are not detrimental for detecting changes in interaural correlation. Thus, limiting factors to binaural benefits in CI listeners could be a result of other temporal and/or spectral deficiencies from electrical stimulation.

Interaural fluctuations and the detection of interaural incoherence. IV. The effect of compression on stimulus statistics

The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether the normalized interaural cross-correlation (CC) model or a model based on interaural phase and level differences can better describe incoherence detection data. The ability to detect interaural incoherence in three sets of reproducible dichotic noises was tested in six listeners. The first set contained noises with a constrained value of the CC and the CC including signal compression. The second set contained noises with a constrained value of the CC including signal compression. The third set contained noises with constrained values in the fluctuations in the interaural differences. Modeling showed that neither the CC model nor the model using the interaural differences could account for the data in any set. Examination of the statistical properties of the stimuli showed that including compression before the calculation of the interaural CC causes a substantial correlation of this metric to the fluctuations in the interaural phase difference. This finding implies that it may be more difficult to discriminate between the common types of binaural models than previously thought.

Interaural fluctuations and the detection of interaural incoherence. III. Narrowband experiments and binaural models

In the first two articles of this series, reproducible noises with a fixed value of interaural coherence (0.992) were used to study the human ability to detect interaural incoherence. It was found that incoherence detection is strongly correlated with fluctuations in interaural differences, especially for narrow noise bandwidths, but it remained unclear what function of the fluctuations best agrees with detection data. In the present article, ten different binaural models were tested against detection data for 14- and 108-Hz bandwidths. These models included different types of binaural processing: independent-interaural-phase-difference/interaural-level-difference, lateral-position, and short-term cross-correlation. Several preprocessing transformations of the interaural differences were incorporated: compression of binaural cues, temporal averaging, and envelope weighting. For the 14-Hz bandwidth data, the most successful model postulated that incoherence is detected via fluctuations of interaural phase and interaural level processed by independent centers. That model correlated with detectability at r=0.87. That model proved to be more successful than short-term cross-correlation models incorporating standard physiologically-based model features (r=0.78). For the 108-Hz bandwidth data, detection performance varied much less among different waveforms, and the data were less able to distinguish between models.

Interaural fluctuations and the detection of interaural incoherence. II. Brief duration noises

Listeners detected a small amount of interaural incoherence in reproducible noises with narrow bandwidths and a center frequency of 500 Hz. The durations of the noise stimuli were 100, 50, or 25 ms, and every one of the noises had the same value of interaural coherence, namely 0.992. When the nominal noise bandwidth was 14 Hz, the ability to detect incoherence was found to depend strongly on the size of the fluctuations in interaural phase and level for durations of 100 and 50 ms. For the duration of 25 ms, performance did not appear to depend entirely on fluctuations. Instead, listeners sometimes recognized incoherence on the basis of laterality. However, when the nominal bandwidth was doubled, leading to a greater number of fluctuations, detection performance at 25 ms resembled that at 50 ms for the smaller bandwidth. It is concluded that the detection of a small amount of interaural incoherence is mediated by fluctuations in phase and level for brief stimulus durations, so long as such fluctuations exist physically. This conclusion presents a promising alternative to models of binaural detection that are based on the short-term cross-correlation in the stimulus.

Interaural fluctuations and the detection of interaural incoherence: Bandwidth effects

One-hundred left-right noise-pairs were generated, all with a fixed value of long-term interaural coherence, 0.9922. The noises had a center frequency of 500 Hz, a bandwidth of 14 Hz, and a duration of 500 ms. Listeners were required to discriminate between these slightly incoherent noises and diotic noises, with a coherence of 1.0. It was found that the value of interaural coherence itself was an inadequate predictor of discrimination. Instead, incoherence was much more readily detected for those noise-pairs with the largest fluctuations in interaural phase or level differences (as measured by the standard deviations). One-hundred noise-pairs with the same value of coherence, 0.9922, and geometric mean frequency of 500 Hz were also generated for bandwidths of 108 and 2394 Hz. It was found that for increasing bandwidth, fluctuations in interaural differences varied less between different noise-pairs and that detection performance varied less as well. The results suggest that incoherence detection is based on the size of interaural fluctuations and that the value of coherence itself predicts performance only in the wideband limit.