Advertisement

A Novel Technique for an Adaptive Feedback Canceller for Hearing Aids

  • Ajay JatavEmail author
  • Ruchi Mehra
  • Tannu Bala
  • Gagandeep Singh
  • Raman Arora
  • Gunjan Dogra
  • Mandeep Kaur Bedi
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 706)

Abstract

This chapter is focused on the implementation aspects of adaptive feedback canceller algorithms and their computational complexity when reducing misalignment and convergence rates. When an adaptive algorithm filter was used for modeling the acoustic feedback, there was wide misalignment due to a fixed step size. Through the use of the prediction–error method (PEM), the bias in the algorithm for an adaptive filter was reduced. The PEM used a variable step size and a full range of adaptive filters were used as a trade-off between the misalignment and the convergence speed. Various performance measures were considered in order to study these algorithms: misalignment, maximum stable gain, added stable gain, and the algorithm execution time. The disadvantage of misalignment and convergence when changing step size has been addressed using a new algorithm that has automatic step size adjustment. This new algorithm demonstrated effectiveness in controlling misalignment. The findings reveal that the misalignment, maximum added gain, and added stable gain improved with the use of the new adaptive filter algorithm. Despite this, the PEM did not satisfy user requirements and so a new system named AFC-PEM MPVSS is proposed. Furthermore, work has been done to measure the quality of signal.

Keywords

Prediction–error Feedback canceller AFC-PEM MPVSS 

References

  1. 1.
    Schepker, H., Doclo, S., Hai, M., Dam, H., Nordholm, S., Tran, LT.: A Modified Practical Variable Step-Size For Feedback Cancellation Using Pre-whitening FiltersGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rombouts, G., Moonen, M., Wouters, J., Spriet, A.: Adaptive feedback cancellation in hearing AIDS. J. Frankl. Instit. 343(6) 545–573 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pandey, A.: Perceptually Motivated Signal Processing for Digital Hearing AIDS (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beerends, J.G., Hollier, M.P., Hekstra, A.P., Rix, A.W.: Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ), an objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrowband telephone networks and speech codecs, p. 862. ITU-T Recommendation (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sun, L., Ifeachor, E., Qiao, Z.: Case study of PESQ performance in live wireless mobile VoIP environment. In: IEEE 19th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, pp. 1–6 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marsh, I., Gronvall, B., Varela, M.: A systematic study of PESQ’s behavior (from a networking perspective). In: Proceedings of the Measurement of Speech and Audio Quality in Networks, May (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pennock, S.: Accuracy of the perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ) algorithm. In: Proceedings of the Measurement of Speech and Audio Quality in Networks Line Workshop (MESAQIN’02), p. 19 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morrissey, P.: How to measure call quality. Netw. Comput. (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stemerdink, Jan A., Beerends, John G.: A perceptual speech-quality measure based on a psychoacoustic sound representation. J. Audio Eng. Soc. 42, 115–123 (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Recommendation P ITU-T: 830, Subjective Performance Assessment of Telephone-Band and Wideband Digital Codecs. Int. Telcommun. Union Radiocommun. Assem (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ITUT Rec: p. 48: Specification for an intermediate reference system. International Telecommunication Union, CH-Geneva (1988)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beerends, J.G., Hollier, M.P., Hekstra, A.P., Rix, A.W.: Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ)—a new method for speech quality assessment of telephone networks and codecs. In: 2001 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2001. Proceedings (ICASSP’01), vol. 2, pp. 749–752 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feldtkeller, R., Zwicker, E.: Das Ohr als Nachrichtenempfänger (1967)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ITU-T Study Group 12: Review of Validation Tests for Objective Speech Quality Measures. Document COM, pp. 12–74, March (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Albu, F., Coanda, H., Rotaru, M.: A variable step size modified decorrelated NLMS algorithm for adaptive feedback cancellation in hearing AIDS. In: Proceedings of the ISETC, vol. 2012, pp. 263–266 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tran, L.: Varible Step-Size Control for PEM (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beerends, J.G., Hollier, M.P., Hekstra, A.P., Rix, A.W., Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ), an objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrowband telephone networks and speech codecs, p. 862. ITU-T Recommendation (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manjunath, T.: Limitations of perceptual evaluation of speech quality on VoIP systems. In: 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting, pp. 1–6 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ITUT Rec: p. 48: Specification for an Intermediate Reference System. International Telecommunication Union, CH-Geneva (1988)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Urban, F., Hellgren, J.: Bias of feedback cancellation algorithms in hearing aids based on direct closed loop identification. IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 9, 906–913 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ajay Jatav
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ruchi Mehra
    • 1
  • Tannu Bala
    • 1
  • Gagandeep Singh
    • 1
  • Raman Arora
    • 1
  • Gunjan Dogra
    • 1
  • Mandeep Kaur Bedi
    • 1
  1. 1.Webtunix Solutions Pvt. Ltd.MohaliIndia

Personalised recommendations