ArticleTrends in hearing
A Binaural Front End for Speech Intelligibility Models: Application to the Hearing-Aid Speech Perception Index (HASPI).
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hearing Aids: What Works Well and What Can Be Improved.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026Review
- Sentence recognition with modulation-filtered speech segments for younger and older adults: Effects of hearing impairment and cognition.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
- Influence of Audibility and Distortion on Recognition of Reverberant Speech for Children and Adults with Hearing Aid Amplification.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2022Article
- An intrusive method for estimating speech intelligibility from noisy and distorted signals.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021Article
- Using Objective Metrics to Measure Hearing Aid Performance.Ear and hearingArticle
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
Binaural hearing can improve the intelligibility of a speech source spatially separated from competing sound sources when compared to co-located conditions. Monaural speech intelligibility models cannot predict this spatial release from masking. A binaural front end is proposed that can be combined with monaural models to do so. From the noisy speech signals at the two ears, it produces binaurally-enhanced monaural signals that can be evaluated by monaural models. A stationary and a time-dependent version of the front end were tested here with the monaural Hearing Aid Speech Perception Index (HASPI) that compares the envelope modulations of the noisy speech to those of the clean speech. The model predictions were compared to the intelligibility scores of three datasets collected with normal-hearing listeners via headphones measurements in anechoic conditions. A stationary speech-shaped noise (SSN) was tested at 10 azimuths in dataset 1. In dataset 2, an SSN or a non-stationary noise were tested at three azimuths, with or without ideal binary mask processing. In dataset 3, the competing sounds were obtained by mixing the signals from an SSN co-located with the target speech, a diffuse noise coming from all directions, and a spatially-separated SSN. The stationary-front-end predictions are very accurate in the conditions with a spatially-separated SSN, while monaural HASPI predictions at the ear with the better signal-to-noise ratio under-estimate intelligibility. The front-end predictions are slightly less accurate for non-stationary noise but under-estimate intelligibility with diffuse noise. The time-dependent version of the front end systematically over-estimates intelligibility at low signal-to-noise ratios.
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.