ArticleTrends in hearing
Estimating Pitch Information From Simulated Cochlear Implant Signals With Deep Neural Networks.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prediction of Auditory Performance in Cochlear Implants Using Machine Learning Methods: A Systematic Review.Audiology research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cochlear implant (CI) users, even with substantial speech comprehension, generally have poor sensitivity to pitch information (or fundamental frequency, F0). This insensitivity is often attributed to limited spectral and temporal resolution in the CI signals. However, the pitch sensitivity markedly varies among individuals, and some users exhibit fairly good sensitivity. This indicates that the CI signal contains sufficient information about F0, and users' sensitivity is predominantly limited by other physiological conditions such as neuroplasticity or neural health. We estimated the upper limit of F0 information that a CI signal can convey by decoding F0 from simulated CI signals (multi-channel pulsatile signals) with a deep neural network model (referred to as the CI model). We varied the number of electrode channels and the pulse rate, which should respectively affect spectral and temporal resolutions of stimulus representations. The F0-estimation performance generally improved with increasing number of channels and pulse rate. For the sounds presented under quiet conditions, the model performance was at best comparable to that of a control waveform model, which received raw-waveform inputs. Under conditions in which background noise was imposed, the performance of the CI model generally degraded by a greater degree than that of the waveform model. The pulse rate had a particularly large effect on predicted performance. These observations indicate that the CI signal contains some information for predicting F0, which is particularly sufficient for targets under quiet conditions. The temporal resolution (represented as pulse rate) plays a critical role in pitch representation under noisy conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.