Neural Tracking of Band-Limited Sine-Wave Speech in Normal Hearing and Cochlear Implant Listeners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2311-1917.2020.08.06Keywords:
Sinusoidal model, electroencephalogram (EEG), cortical entrainment, speech intelligibility, hearing prosthesis.Abstract
A sine-wave speech represents complex speech with a limited number of sinusoidal components. Functionally, its strategy draws a close similarity to the signal processing strategy in cochlear implant (CI) which transmits speech envelope information in limited number of channels. In this study, we investigated how synchronous cortical activities to speech envelope relates to the speech intelligibility of sine-wave speech in different bandwidths with both normal hearing (NH) and CI listeners. 12 NH and four CI participants were recruited. We divided our NH participants into two groups: 1) Six NH listeners, 2) six NH listening to CI simulation synthesized using a noise vocoder. In our third group, 3) four CI users, one of them participated in only behavioral tests. Neural tracking was obtained using multi-channel electroencephalogram (EEG) system and cross-checked with behavioural performance, speech perception scores and speech quality ratings. Our result showed that intelligible sine-wave speech can be built with a small number of sinusoidal components selected from the original speech spectrum. Our cross-correlation analysis between cortical activities and speech envelope fluctuation showed an increasing trend in their synchrony with sine-wave speech built using more sinusoidal components for both group 2) and 3). Cortical entrainment to speech envelope is more observable in CI users compared to NH listened to CI simulated sine-wave speech. Our result have implications for understanding of neural tracking in terms of spectrally degraded speech perception in NH and CI individuals.
References
Lee S, Akbarzadeh S, Singh S, Tan C. A speech processing strategy based on sinusoidal speech model for cochlear implant users 2018 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC). Honolulu, HI, USA: IEEE 2018; pp. 393-7. https://doi.org/10.23919/APSIPA.2018.8659620
Hillenbrand JM, Clark MJ, Baer CA. Perception of sinewave vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 2011; 129(6): 3991-4000. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3573980
Carrell TD, Opie JM. The effect of amplitude comodulation on auditory object formation in sentence perception. Percept Psychophys 1992; 52(4): 437-45. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206703
Remez RE, Rubin PE, Pisoni DB, Carrell TD. Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science (80-) 1981; 212(4497): 947-9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7233191
McAulay RJ, Quatieri TF. Speech analysis/Synthesis based on a sinusoidal representation. IEEE Trans Acoust 1986; 34(4): 744-54. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASSP.1986.1164910
Kates JM. Speech enhancement based on a constrained sinusoidal model. J Speech, Lang Hear Res 1994; 37(2): 449-64. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3702.449
Timms O. Speech processing strategies based on the sinusoidal speech model for the profoundly hearing impaired. Dr Diss 2003.
Ding N, Simon JZ. Neural coding of continuous speech in auditory cortex during monaural and dichotic listening. J Neurophysiol 2012; 107(1): 78-89. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00297.2011
Di Liberto GM, O’sullivan JA, Lalor EC. Low-frequency cortical entrainment to speech reflects phoneme-level processing. Curr Biol 2015; 25(19): 2457-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.030
Khalighinejad B, Cruzatto da Silva G, Mesgarani N. Dynamic encoding of acoustic features in neural responses to continuous speech. J Neurosci 2017; 37(8): 2176-85. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2383-16.2017
Riecke L, Formisano E, Sorger B, Başkent D, Gaudrain E. Neural entrainment to speech modulates speech intelligibility. Curr Biol 2018; 28(2): 161-169.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.11.033
Luo H, Poeppel D. Phase patterns of neuronal responses reliably discriminate speech in human auditory cortex. Neuron 2007; 54(6): 1001-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.06.004
Aiken SJ, Picton TW. Human cortical responses to the speech envelope. Ear Hear 2008; 29(2): 139-57. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31816453dc
Ding N, Simon JZ. Adaptive temporal encoding leads to a background-insensitive cortical representation of speech. J Neurosci 2013; 33(13): 5728-35. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5297-12.2013
Horton C, D’Zmura M, Srinivasan R. Suppression of competing speech through entrainment of cortical oscillations. J Neurophysiol 2013; 109(12): 3082-93. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01026.2012
Kong YY, Mullangi A, Ding N. Differential modulation of auditory responses to attended and unattended speech in different listening conditions. Hear Res 2014; 316: 73-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2014.07.009
O’Sullivan JA, Power AJ, Mesgarani N, Rajaram S, Foxe JJ, Shinn-Cunningham BG, et al. Attentional selection in a cocktail party environment can be decoded from single-Trial EEG. cereb cortex 2015; 25(7): 1697-706. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht355
Ding N, Melloni L, Zhang H, Tian X, Poeppel D. Cortical tracking of hierarchical linguistic structures in connected speech. Nat Neurosci 2015; 19(1): 158-64. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4186
Ding N, Melloni L, Yang A, Wang Y, Zhang W, Poeppel D. Characterizing neural entrainment to hierarchical linguistic units using electroencephalography (EEG). Front Hum Neurosci 2017; 11: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00481
Kösem A, van Wassenhove V. Distinct contributions of low and high-frequency neural oscillations to speech comprehension. Lang Cogn Neurosci 2017; 32(5): 536-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1238495
Kong YY, Somarowthu A, Ding N. Effects of dpectral fegradation on sttentional modulation of vortical suditory responses to continuous speech. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2015; 16(6): 783-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-015-0540-x
Verschueren E, Somers B, Francart T. Neural envelope tracking as a measure of speech understanding in cochlear implant users. Hear Res 2019; 373: 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2018.12.004
Kumagai Y, Matsui R, Tanaka T. Music familiarity affects EEG entrainment when little attention is paid. Front Hum Neurosci 2018; 12: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00444
Spahr AJ, Dorman MF, Litvak LM, Van Wie S, Gifford RH, Loizou PC, et al. Development and validation of the AzBio sentence lists. Ear Hear 2012; 33(1): 112-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31822c2549
Akbarzadeh S, Lee S, Chen F, Tan C. The effect of perceived sound quality of speech in noisy speech perception by normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners 2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC). Berlin, Germany, pp. 3119-22. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2019.8857952
Goh WD, Pisoni DB, Kirk KI, Remez RE. Audio-visual perception of sinewave speech in an adult cochlear implant user: A case study. Ear Hear 2001; 22(5): 412-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-200110000-00005
Vanthornhout J, Decruy L, Wouters J, Simon JZ, Francart T. Speech intelligibility rredicted from neural entrainment of the speech envelope. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2018; 19(2): 181-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-018-0654-z
Ding N, Chatterjee M, Simon JZ. Robust cortical entrainment to the speech envelope relies on the spectro-temporal fine structure. Neuroimage 2014; 88: 41-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.10.054
Müller JA, Wendt D, Kollmeier B, Debener S, Brand T. Effect of speech rate on neural tracking of speech. Front Psychol 2019; 10: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00449
Javel E. Acoustic and electrical encoding of temporal information. Cochlear Implant. New York: Springer 1990; pp. 247-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3256-8_1
