EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 9 (2025) Acta Acust., 9 (2025) 74 References
Issue
Acta Acust.
Volume 9, 2025
Topical Issue - Spatial and binaural hearing: From neural processes to applications
Article Number 74
Number of page(s) 14
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/aacus/2025054
Published online 27 November 2025
  1. J.M. Kates, K.H. Arehart: The hearing-aid speech perception index (HASPI). Speech Communication 65 (2014) 75–93. [Google Scholar]
  2. J.M. Kates, K.H. Arehart: The hearing-aid speech perception index (HASPI) version 2. Speech Communication 131 (2021) 35–46. [Google Scholar]
  3. J.M. Kates, K.H. Arehart: An overview of the HASPI and HASQI metrics for predicting speech intelligibility and speech quality for normal hearing, hearing loss, and hearing aids. Hearing Research 426 (2022) 108608. [Google Scholar]
  4. A.W. Bronkhorst, R. Plomp: The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83 (1988) 1508–1506. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. J.F. Culling, M.L. Hawley, R.Y. Litovsky: The role of head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 116 (2004) 1057–1065. [Google Scholar]
  6. M. Lavandier, J.F. Culling: Prediction of binaural speech intelligibility against noise in rooms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 127 (2010) 387–399. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. N.I. Durlach: Equalization and cancellation theory of binaural masking-level differences. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 35 (1963) 1206–1218. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. N.I. Durlach: Binaural signal detection: equalization and cancellation theory, in: Foundations of Modern Theory Vol. II, J.V. Tobias, ed. Academic, New York, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  9. L.R. Bernstein, C. Trahiotis: An interaural-correlation-based approach that accounts for a wide variety of binaural detection data. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 141 (2017) 1150–1160. [Google Scholar]
  10. ANSI: Methods for the calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index. Am. Nat. Std. Inst. S3.5-1997 (1997) Approved 6 June 1997. [Google Scholar]
  11. R. Beutelmann, T. Brand: Prediction of speech intelligibility in spatial noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120 (2006) 331–342. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Beutelmann, T. Brand, B. Kollmeier: Revision, extension, and evaluation of a binaural speech intelligibility model. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 127 (2010) 2479–2497. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. R. Wan, N.I. Durlach, H.S. Colburn: Application of an extended equalization-cancellation model to speech intelligibility with spatially distributed maskers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 128 (2010) 3678–3690. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. C.F. Hauth, S.C. Berning, B. Kollmeier, T. Brand: Modeling binaural unmasking of speech using a bind binaural processing stage. Trends in Hearing 24 (2020) 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  15. C.H. Taal, R.C. Hendriks, R. Heusdens, J. Jensen: An algorithm for intelligibility prediction of time-frequency weighted noisy speech. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 19 (2011)2125–2136. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. A.H. Andersen, J.M. de Haan, Z.-H. Tan, J. Jensen: Predicting the intelligibility of noisy and nonlinearly processed binaural speech. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 24 (2016) 1908–1920. [Google Scholar]
  17. A.H. Andersen, J.M. de Haan, Z.-H. Tan, J. Jensen: Refinement and validation of the binaural short time objective intelligibility measure for spatially diverse conditions. Speech Communication 102 (2018) 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  18. A. Chabot-Leclerc, E.N. MacDonald, T. Dau: Predicting binaural speech intelligibility using the signal-to-noise ratio in the envelope power spectrum domain. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 140 (2016) 192–205. [Google Scholar]
  19. T. Biberger, S.D. Ewert: Towards a simplified and generalized monaural and binaural auditory model for psychoacoustics and speech intelligibility. Acta Acustica 6 (2022) 23. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  20. S.D. Ewert, W. Schubotz, T. Brand, B. Kollmeier: Binaural masking release in symmetric listening conditions with spectro-temporally modulated maskers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 142 (2017) 12–28. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. H.J.M. Steeneken, T. Houtgast: A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 67 (1980) 318–326. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. S.J. van Wijngaarden, R. Drullman: Binaural intelligibility prediction based on the speech transmission index. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123 (2008) 4514–4523. [Google Scholar]
  23. B.A. Titalim, C.O. Mawalim, S. Okada, M. Unoki: Speech intelligibility prediction for hearing aids using an auditory model and acoustic parameters, in: Proceedings of 2022 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference, Nov. 7–10, Chiang Mai, 2022, pp. 1077–1085. [Google Scholar]
  24. C.O. Mawalim, B.A. Titalim, M. Unoki, S. Okada: OBISHI: Objective binaural intelligibility score for the hearing impaired, in: Proceedings of 18th Australasian International Conference of Speech Science and Technology, December 13–16, 2022, pp. 111–115. [Google Scholar]
  25. M. Lavandier, S. Jelfs, J.F. Culling, A.J. Watkins, A.P. Raimond, S.J. Makin: Binaural prediction of speech intelligibility in reverberant rooms with multiple noise sources. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 131 (2012) 218–231. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. T. Vicente, M. Lavandier: Further validation of a binaural model predicting speech intelligibility against envelope-modulated noises. Hearing Research 390 (2020) 107937. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. T. Vicente, M. Lavandier, J. Buchholz: A binaural model implementing an internal noise to predict the effect of hearing impairment on speech intelligibility in non-stationary noises. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 148 (2020) 3305–3317. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. J.M. Kates: Cross-correlation procedures for measuring noise and distortion in AGC hearing aids. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107 (2000) 3407–3141. [Google Scholar]
  29. J.M. Kates, M. Lavandier, R.K. Muralimanohar, E.M.H. Lundberg, K.H. Arehart: Binaural speech intelligibility for combinations of noise, reverberation, and hearing-aid signal processing. PLOS One 20 (2025) e0317266. [Google Scholar]
  30. J.B. Allen, D.A. Berkley: Image method for efficiently simulating small-room acoustics. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 65 (1979) 943–950. [Google Scholar]
  31. J.M. Kates, E.J. Brandewie: Adding air absorption to simulated room acoustic models. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 148 (2020) EL408–EL413. [Google Scholar]
  32. M.D. Burkhard, R.M. Sacks: Anthropometric manikin for acoustic research. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 58 (1975) 214–222. [Google Scholar]
  33. K.H. Arehart, E. Lundberg, S.-H. Chon, L.O. Harvey Jr, J.M. Kates, M.C. Anderson, V.H. Rallapalli, P.E. Souza: A comparison of speech intelligibility and subjective quality with hearing-aid processing in older adults with hearing loss. International Journal of Audiology 61 (2022) 46–58. [Google Scholar]
  34. J.M. Kates: Modeling the effects of single-microphone noise suppression. Speech Communication 90 (2017) 15–25. [Google Scholar]
  35. D. Byrne, H. Dillon: The National Acoustic Laboratories’ (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear and Hearing 7 (1986) 257–265. [Google Scholar]
  36. G. Keidser, H. Dillon, M. Flax, T. Ching, S. Brewer: The NAL-NL2 prescription procedure. Audiology Research 1 (2011) e24. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. P.E. Souza, K.H. Arehart, J.M. Kates, N.B.H. Croghan, N. Gehani: Exploring the limits of frequency lowering. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 56 (2013) 1349–1363. [Google Scholar]
  38. J.M. Kates: The electroacoustic system, in: Digital Hearing Aids. San Diego, Plural, 2008, pp. 51–74. [Google Scholar]
  39. V.H. Rallapalli, A. Mueller, R. Appleton, P.E. Souza: Survey of hearing aid signal processing features across manufacturers, in: Presented at the American Academy of Audiology 2018, Nashville, TN, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  40. E.H. Rothauser: IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics 17 (1969) 225–246. [Google Scholar]
  41. L.M. Panfili, J. Haywood, D.R. McCloy, P.E. Souza, R.A. Wright: The UW/NU Corpus, Version 2.0 (1987). https://depts.washington.edu/phonlab/projects/uwnu.php. [Google Scholar]
  42. R.M. Cox, G.C. Alexander, C. Gilmore: Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST). Ear and Hearing 5 (1987) 119S–126S. [Google Scholar]
  43. K. Smeds, F. Wolters, M. Rung: Estimation of signal-to-noise ratios in realistic sound scenarios. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 26 (2015) 183–196. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. J.M. Kates: An auditory model for intelligibility and quality predictions, in: Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics. 165th Meeting. Acoustical Society of America, Montreal June 2–7. Vol. 19, 2013, p. 050184. [Google Scholar]
  45. J.M. Kates: A time domain digital cochlear model. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 39 (1991) 2573–2592. [Google Scholar]
  46. M. Cooke: Modelling Auditory Processing and Organization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  47. R.D. Patterson, M.H. Allerhand, C. Giguère: Time-domain modeling of peripheral auditory processing: a modular architecture and a software platform. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 98 (1995) 1890–1894. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. B.C.J. Moore, D.A. Vickers, C.J. Plack, A.J. Oxenham: Inter-relationship between different psychoacoustic measures assumed to be related to the cochlear active mechanism. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106 (1999) 2761–2778. [Google Scholar]
  49. B.C.J. Moore, B.R. Glasberg: Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 74 (1999) 750–753. [Google Scholar]
  50. R.J. Baker, S. Rosen: Auditory filter nonlinearity in mild/moderate hearing impairment. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111 (2002) 1330–1339. [Google Scholar]
  51. R.J. Baker, S. Rosen: Auditory filter nonlinearity across frequency using simultaneous notch-noise masking. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119 (2006) 454–462. [Google Scholar]
  52. M.A. Ruggero, N.C. Rich, A. Recio, S. Narayan, L. Robles: Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101 (1997) 2151–2163. [Google Scholar]
  53. X. Zhang, M.G. Heinz, I.C. Bruce, L.H. Carney: A phenomenological model for the response of auditory nerve fibers: I. Nonlinear tuning with compression and suppression. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109 (2001) 648–670. [Google Scholar]
  54. D.M. Harris, P. Dallos: Forward masking of auditory nerve fiber responses. Journal of Neurophysiology 42 (1979) 1083–1107. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. M. Wojtczak, J.A. Biem, C. Micheyl, A.J. Oxenham: Perception of across-frequency asynchrony and the role of cochlear delay. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 131 (2012) 363–377. [Google Scholar]
  56. M. Nitschmann, J.L. Verhey, B. Kollmeier: Monaural and binaural frequency selectivity in hearing-impaired subjects. International Journal of Audiology 49 (2010) 357–367. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. A.J. Kolarik, J.F. Culling: Measurement of the binaural auditory filter using a detection task. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 127 (2010) 3009–3017. [Google Scholar]
  58. J. Breebart, S. van de Par, A. Kohlrausch: Binaural processing model based on contralateral inhibition. II. Dependence on spectral parameters. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 110 (2001) 1089–1104. [Google Scholar]
  59. J.M. Kates: Understanding compression: modeling the effects of dynamic-range compression in hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology 49 (2010) 395–409. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. V.P. Sivonen: Directional loudness and binaural summation for wideband and reverberant sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121 (2007)2852–2861. [Google Scholar]
  61. B.C.J. Moore, M. Jervis, L. Harries, J. Schlittenlacher: Testing and refining a loudness model for time-varying sounds incorporating binaural inhibition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 143 (2018) 1504–1513. [Google Scholar]
  62. V. Mitra, H. Franco, M. Graciarena, A. Mandal: Normalized amplitude modulation features for large vocabulary noise-robust speech recognition, in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. Kyoto, March 25–30, 2012, pp. 4117–4120. [Google Scholar]
  63. S.A. Zahorian, M. Rothenberg: Principal-components analysis for low-redundancy encoding of speech spectra. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 69 (1981) 832–845. [Google Scholar]
  64. S.D. Ewert, T. Dau: Characterizing frequency selectivity for envelope fluctuations. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 108 (2000) 1181–1196. [Google Scholar]
  65. S.D. Ewert, J.L. Verhey, T. Dau: Spectro-temporal processing in the envelope-frequency domain. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 112 (2002)2921–2931. [Google Scholar]
  66. J.M. Kates, K.H. Arehart: Comparing the information conveyed by envelope modulation for speech intelligibility, speech quality, and music quality. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 138 (2015) 2470–2482. [Google Scholar]
  67. D.E. Rumelhart, G.E. Hinton, R.J. Williams: Learning internal representations by error propagation, in: Parallel Distributed Processing, D.E. Rumelhart, J.L. McClelland, eds. Vol. 1. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  68. L. Breiman: Bagging predictors. Machine Learning 24 (1996) 123–140. [Google Scholar]
  69. L.K. Hansen, P. Salamon: Neural network ensembles. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 12 (1990) 993–1001. [Google Scholar]
  70. B. Efron: Estimating the error rate of a prediction rule: improvement on cross-validation. Journal of the American Statistical Association 78 (1983) 316–331. [Google Scholar]
  71. A.M. Kubiak, J. Rennies, S.D. Ewert, B. Kollmeier: Prediction of individual speech recognition performance in complex listening conditions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 147 (2020) 1379–1391. [Google Scholar]
  72. C.V. Pavlovic, G.A. Studebaker, R.L. Sherbecoe: An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 80 (1986) 50–57. [Google Scholar]
  73. T.Y.C. Ching, H. Dillon, D. Byrne: Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 103 (1998) 1128–1140. [Google Scholar]
  74. M. Lavandier J.M. Buchholz, B. Rana: A binaural model predicting speech intelligibility in the presence of stationary noise and noise-vocoded speech interferers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Acta Acustica 104 (2018) 909–913. [Google Scholar]
  75. M. Lavandier C.R. Mason, L.S. Baltzell, V. Best: Individual differences in speech intelligibility at a cocktail party: a modeling perspective. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 150 (2021) 1076–1087. [Google Scholar]
  76. J.L. Verhey, M. Nitschmann: Binaural spectral resolution as a function of interaural masker correlation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 135 (2014) 1993–2001. [Google Scholar]
  77. B. Eurich, J. Encke, S.D. Ewert, M. Dietz: Lower interaural coherence in off-signal bands impairs binaural detection. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 151 (2022) 3927–3936. [Google Scholar]
  78. J.L. Verhey, S. van de Par: Binaural frequency selectivity in humans. European Journal of Neuroscience 51 (2020) 1179–1190. [Google Scholar]
  79. J.L. Verhey, M. Kordus, V. Drga, I. Yaslin: Effect of efferent activation on binaural frequency selectivity. Hearing Research 350 (2017) 152–129. [Google Scholar]
  80. A. Farhadi, S.G. Jennings, E.A. Strickland, L.H. Carney: Subcortical auditory model including efferent dynamic gain control with inputs from cochlear nucleus and inferior colliculus. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 154 (2023)3644–3659. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.