Subject: Re: AUDITORY Digest - 23 Feb 2009 to 24 Feb 2009 (#2009-43) From: Judy Brown <brown@xxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:02:49 -0500 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>I would really like to be able to read the envelope extraction msgs. Judy AUDITORY automatic digest system wrote: > There are 10 messages totalling 825 lines in this issue. > > Topics of the day: > > 1. envelope extraction (2) > 2. information transmission analyses (3) > 3. job advert: Investigator Scientist at MRC-IHR, Glasgow > 4. analysis of paired comparison data > 5. early history of Auditory Neuroscience (2) > 6. Fwd: early history of Auditory Neuroscience > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:26:19 +0000 > From: Roy Patterson <rdp1@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: envelope extraction > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> > </head> > <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> > Hello Ben,<br> > <p class="MsoNormal"><br> > You are right to question auditory models with transduction filters > whose cutoff is below about 1000 Hz. They are often just trying to > explain amplitude modulation detection without concern for other > aspects of auditory processing.<br> > </p> > <p class="MsoNormal">There is a discussion of the different methods of > extracting > envelopes in Yost et al. 1998, reference below. It concludes that if > you want > to be able to explain the pitch shift of the residue, there is only one > of the > methods that can be used to represent auditory processing, and that is > half-wave rectification followed by lowpass filtering. The filter needs > to have > a relatively high cutoff frequency, 800-1200 Hz and beyond the cutoff, > the > filter should fall about 24 dB per octave.<o:p> </o:p></p> > <p class="MsoNormal">Regards Roy P<br> > <br> > Yost, W.A., <strong>Patterson, R.D. </strong>and Sheft, S. (<strong>1998</strong>). > The role of the envelope in processing iterated rippled noise. <em>J. > Acoust. > Soc. Am.</em> <strong>104</strong> 2349-2361.</p> > <br> > <br> > <br> > Hornsby, Benjamin Wade Young wrote: > <blockquote cite="mid:20090223170018.3737951E2@xxxxxxxx" > type="cite"> > <meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> > <div> > <p> <span>Hi all, </span> </p> > <p> <span>I hope the answer to this question is not too obvious > but,… > We have recently been talking about auditory processing models, in > specific, temporal > processing models, many of which incorporate an envelope extraction > stage. To > do this I’ve seen in many cases the use of half wave rectification > followed by a low pass filter. The cutoff for this filter is generally > a pretty > low frequency, say around 50 Hz or so. A colleague suggested that the > actual cutoff > frequency should be based on the assumed time constant of the system or > subsystem being evaluated. I’ve been trying to determine the > physiologic rational > for such a low frequency filter (slow time constant) in models of > auditory > processing. Neural processing limitations like the refractory period of > the > neuron are much faster than this. Anyone have a reference or two that > might > help explain the physiologic rational for this low frequency filter > cutoff? </span> </p> > <p> <span> </span> </p> > <p> <span>Thanks much, </span> </p> > <p> <span> </span> </p> > <p> <span>Ben </span> </p> > <p> <span> </span> </p> > <p> <span> </span> </p> > </div> > </blockquote> > <br> > <br> > <pre class="moz-signature" cols="60">-- > * ** *** * ** *** * ** *** * ** *** * ** *** * > Roy D. Patterson > Centre for the Neural Basis of Hearing > Department of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience > University of Cambridge > Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EG > > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.pdn.cam.ac.uk/cnbh/">http://www.pdn.cam.ac.uk/cnbh/</a> > phone: +44 (1223) 333819 office > fax: +44 (1223) 333840 department > email <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rdp1@xxxxxxxx">rdp1@xxxxxxxx</a> > > > </pre> > </body> > </html> > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:29:24 +0000 > From: caroline jacquier <caro_jacquier@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: information transmission analyses > > --0-282690217-1235467764=:86427 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Dear members,=0A=0AIwould like to analyse phonetic feature transmission (es= > pecially voicing and place of articulation of french plosive consonants) on= > the basis of individual confusion=C2=A0matrices. My study is about compres= > sed speech perception in dyslexic adults. =0AI have already downloaded the = > software for information transfer and SINFA analysis (Stuart Rosen ) and I = > have run the analyses (on=C2=A032 subjects).=0AMy first question is: which = > value is the more relevant in the report (TRANS, TRANS/INPUT or TRANS/TI) ?= > =0AMy second question is about individual confusion matrices: Do I have to = > do one analyse per subject ?=C2=A0=0A=C2=A0=0AI hope that someone could hel= > p me.=0AThank you very much.=0ABest regards,=0A=C2=A0=0ACaroline=0A=0A=0A = > > --0-282690217-1235467764=:86427 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <html><head><style type=3D"text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></he= > ad><body><div style=3D"font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;= > font-size:12pt"><DIV>Dear members,</DIV>=0A<DIV> </DIV>=0A<DIV>I<FONT = > face=3D"times new roman, new york, times, serif"> would like to analyse pho= > netic feature transmission (especially voicing and place of articulation of= > french plosive consonants) on the basis of individual confusion matri= > ces. My study is about compressed speech perception in dyslexic adults. </F= > ONT></DIV>=0A<DIV><FONT face=3D"times new roman, new york, times, serif">I = > have already downloaded the s<SPAN class=3D375500014-17022009>oftware for i= > nformation transfer and SINFA analysis (Stuart Rosen ) and I have run the a= > nalyses (on 32 subjects).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375= > 500014-17022009><FONT face=3D"times new roman, new york, times, serif">My f= > irst question is: which value is the more relevant in the report (TRANS, TR= > ANS/INPUT or TRANS/TI) ?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014= > -17022009><FONT face=3D"times new roman, new york, times, serif">My second = > question is about individual confusion matrices: Do I have to do one analys= > e per subject ? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-17= > 022009></SPAN> </DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-17022009>I hope t= > hat someone could help me.</SPAN></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-1702= > 2009>Thank you very much.</SPAN></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-17022= > 009>Best regards,</SPAN></DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-17022009></SP= > AN> </DIV>=0A<DIV><SPAN class=3D375500014-17022009>Caroline</SPAN></DI= > V>=0A<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D375500014-17022009></SP= > AN></FONT> </DIV>=0A<DIV><BR></DIV></div><br>=0A=0A=0A=0A </body>= > </html> > --0-282690217-1235467764=:86427-- > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:51:04 +0000 > From: Stuart Rosen <stuart@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: information transmission analyses > > I highly recommend you read the classic book by Attneave in order to get > to grips with information transfer measures generally: > > Attneave F. Applications of information theory to psychology: a summary > of basic concepts, methods, and results. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and > Winston, 1959. 120 p. [University of Oregon, Eugene, OR] > > In my experience %TRANS (=TRANS/INPUT) has proved to be the most useful > measure but TRANS/TI can give you an idea about how important any > particular feature is in overall performance. TRANS itself is probably > less useful because the amount of information in each feature differs > considerably. > > How you do the analyses depends on what questions you are trying to > answer. Analysing individual matrices and then doing standard > statistical tests is one way to avoid the difficulties of doing > statistical analyses on a small number of matrices (which require > something like log-linear analyses). On the other hand, looking at group > matrices can make it easier to spot trends. > > Bon chance! > > Yours - Stuart > -- ______________________________________________________________________________ Judy Brown http://www.media.mit.edu/~brown jbrown @xxxxxxxx wellesley dot edu http://www.wellesley.edu/Physics/brown/jbrown.html brown @xxxxxxxx media dot mit dot edu E15 483, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 ______________________________________________________________________________ PHOTOS at http://www.media.mit.edu/~brown/PHOTOS/PHOTOS.html ______________________________________________________________________________