ArticleScientific reports2025
Leveraging spatial cues from cochlear implant microphones to efficiently enhance speech separation in naturalistic listening scenes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the success of speech separation approaches for dry (non-reverb) speech mixtures, speech separation in naturalistic, spatial, and reverberant acoustic environments remains challenging. This limits the effectiveness of current speech separation methods for assistive hearing devices as well as neuroprosthetic devices such as cochlear implants (CIs). Here, we investigate whether a deep neural network model for speech separation can utilize the spatial information in naturalistic listening scenes as captured by a CI's microphones to improve separation performance. We examined the impact of latent spatial cues (inherently present in two-channel speech mixtures, but need to be learned from these mixtures), as well as pre-computed spatial cues added to the speech mixtures as auxiliary input features (inter-channel level and phase differences, ILDs and IPDs). Specifically, we introduce a two-channel version of the SuDoRM-RF speech separation model, which takes as input speech mixtures recorded with two CI microphones and shows that latent spatial cues enhance separation performance without affecting model efficiency in terms of model complexity and inference latency. Pre-computed spatial cues - especially IPDs - enhanced separation performance even more, but simultaneously reduced model efficiency. Finally, simulating a CI user's listening experience with a vocoder showed that the beneficial effect of spatial cues on DNN speech separation persists even if the separated speech streams are spectrotemporally degraded as in the output of a CI.
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.