Sound signal processing.

C H Chouard; B Meyer; F Chabolle; N Alcaras; D Gegu

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 6596857

Sound signal processing.

C H Chouard·B Meyer·F Chabolle·N Alcaras·D Gegu

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the CHORIMAC-12, the French device, the whole speech information despite its redundancy is transmitted to the few cochlear nerve fibers that are still present. Only loud speech intensities between 40 db and 100 db are introduced in a filter battery which gives out the frequency information in 12 channels including the 100-6000 Hz. This 60 db intensity scale is transmitted in a compression rate of about 6 db. The time sampling is 3 msec. A 12 electrode bearer or 12 separate electrodes (in case of ossified cochlea) transmit the electrical information. The electrical stimulus is a square wave: its frequency is equal or inferior to 300 Hz; its voltage may vary between 2.5 and 6.5 volts; its duration may vary between 0 and 200 mu sec. The performances of the system is demonstrated by means of a system of computerized psychophysic tests and speech intelligibility tests.

Explore related subjects

Cochlear Implants Cochlear Nerve Deafness Electrodes, Implanted Humans Nerve Fibers Phonetics Speech Acoustics Speech Perception Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

C H Chouard, B Meyer, F Chabolle, N Alcaras, D Gegu. 1984. Sound signal processing.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6596857/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1992

[Cochlear implantation].

Since the Israeli cochlear implant program was started in June 1989, 74 candidates have been evaluated for implantation. The main causes for hearing loss were meningitis (16 patients), aminoglycoside toxicity (9), congenital (6), viral (e.g. mumps) (6), and middle ear infection. Candidates were rejected mainly due to psychosocial factors (40%) and audiological parameters (30%). 16 postlingual deaf were implanted. In 7 of them (43.7%) the results were excellent, in 4 (25.0%) good, in 3 (18.7%) fair; 1 case is currently in a training program and 1 is a failure. There were 2 major complications: facial nerve palsy which necessitated surgical decompression, and insertion of the electrodes into the hypotympanic air cells, corrected by reoperation.

Cochlear Implants↗

PubMed1992

[Cochlear implantation].

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cochlear Implants↗

PubMed1992

Performance over time with a nucleus or Ineraid cochlear implant.

This investigation determined whether the audiological performance of cochlear implant users varied with experience. Thirteen Nucleus and 14 Ineraid subjects were evaluated at 1, 9, and 18 mo after cochlear implant connection. Ten Nucleus and five Ineraid subjects were tested at 30 mo. On average, the ability of the subjects to recognize words and phonemes in an audition-only condition improved during the first 9 mo, as did their ability to recognize spondees in noise. The phoneme scores continued to improve during the next 9 mo. Environmental sound recognition improved gradually; significant improvement from the 1 mo scores was not noted until 18 mo. About half of the subjects who demonstrated poor word recognition at 1 mo showed significantly improved percent word correct scores by 18 mo. The Nucleus and Ineraid subjects did not differ in their patterns of change over time. An information transmission analysis performed on the subjects' consonant confusion matrices showed relatively little change for the nasality and place features during the first 18 mo, and relatively large change for the voice, duration, and frication features. Most improvement in the feature scores occurred during the first 9 mo.

Cochlear Implants↗