Download præsentationen
Præsentation er lastning. Vent venligst
Offentliggjort afJohan Ludvigsen Redigeret for ca. et år siden
1
Transposed tones vs Gaussian impulses G. Christopher Stecker Dept of Speech & Hearing Sciences University of Washington
2
Background: stimuli for envelope ITD at high frequency –Sinusoidal amplitude modulation –Effects of modulation frequency, duration (Nuetzel & Hafter 1976) –Filtered impulse trains Independent manipulation of overall bandwidth and rate of modulation Analog Filtered Impulses: Hafter & Dye 1983, Hafter et al. 1990 Digital Gaussian Impulses: Buell & Hafter 1988, Hafter & Buell 1990, Saberi 1996, Stecker & Hafter 2002 –Transposed tones Proper comparison (given peripheral models) to low-freq tones van de Par & Kohlrausch 1997, Bernstein & Trahiotis 2002, Griffin et al. 2005.
3
SAM TT GI
4
SAM TT GI
5
SAM TT GI
6
SAM TT GI
7
SAM TT GI
8
SAM TT GI
9
SAM TT GI
10
SAM TT GI
11
SAM TT GI
12
SAM TT GI
13
Comparing signals Show figures
14
Comparing signals Show figures Differences: –GI has 2 parameters for bandwidth, rate –TT / SAM have 1 parameter for modulation rate –GI & TT have “off periods” and steeper slopes not found in SAM
15
Some data SAM (Bernstein & Trahiotis 2002) TT (Bernstein & Trahiotis 2002) GI (Buell & Hafter 1988) AI (Hafter et al 1990) AI (Hafter & Dye 1983)
16
Same data GI (Buell & Hafter 1988) AI (Hafter et al 1990) AI (Hafter & Dye 1983) SAM (Bernstein & Trahiotis 2002) TT (Bernstein & Trahiotis 2002)
17
Questions / Issues What are the important features of impulsive envelopes (for effective ITD)? Do rate limitation and binaural adaptation relate to one another? Onset vs Ongoing cues differ b/w studies. –What counts as “onset”?
18
Future developments? GI trains –Arbitrary timing –Dynamic parameters Transposed stimuli –Extend to many LF modulators (e.g. noise) Study of duration / rate / bandwidth?
34
back
Lignende præsentationer
© 2024 SlidePlayer.dk Inc.
All rights reserved.