Temporal resolution |
The ability to follow rapid changes in a sound over time |
The bottom line |
People manage to maintain good temporal resolution without compromising sensitivity by using intelligent processing. |
Temporal resolution: How good is a listener at following rapid changes in a sound? |
Auditory nerve fibers do not fire at the instant at which sounds begin or end. | |
Auditory nerve fibers do not fire on every cycle of sound. | |
Adaptation occurs to longer duration sounds. | |
Spontaneous activity occurs when no sound is present |
Following rapid changes in sound |
The auditory nerve response does not follow changes with perfect precision |
Averaging over time is one way the auditory system could Òsmooth outÓ the bumpy response of auditory nerve fibers |
The time over which you average makes a difference |
The temporal window |
The temporal window |
Hydraulic analogy: How long before the next bucket leaves for the brain? |
Hydraulic analogy: How long before the next bucket leaves for the brain? |
People can Òadd upÓ sound energy for |
5 ms | |
50 ms | |
200 ms | |
1500 ms |
Temporal resolution: How short are the ÒsamplesÓ of sound? |
Hypothesis # 1: We integrate over 200-300 ms. |
Sensitivity-resolution tradeoff |
If you extend the integration time to improve sensitivity, you lose resolution. |
So how well should I be able to discriminate a change in the duration of a sound? |
How to measure temporal resolution |
Duration discrimination | |
Gap detection | |
Amplitude modulation detection |
Problem in measuring temporal resolution: ÒSpectral splatterÓ |
Duration discrimination |
Duration discrimination |
WeberÕs Law? NO | |
Duration discrimination can be very acute - much better than 50-75 ms. |
Gap detection |
Gap detection |
Is it temporal resolution or intensity resolution? |
Amplitude modulation detection |
By how much do I have to modulate the amplitude of the sound for the listener to tell that it is amplitude modulated, at different rates of modulation? |
Slide 23 |
Modulation depth |
2AFC AM Detection |
Modulation depth, 20 log m |
AM detection as a function of modulation rate |
The temporal modulation transfer function (TMTF) |
What sort of filter has a response that looks like this? |
low-pass | |
high-pass | |
bandpass | |
band reject |
The TMTF is like a low-pass filter. That means that we canÕt hear |
slow amplitude modulations | |
high frequencies | |
low frequencies | |
fast amplitude modulations |
TMTF at different carrier frequencies |
Conclusions from TMTF |
People are very good at AM detection up to 50-60 Hz modulation rate (and intensity resolution effects are controlled) | |
50-60 Hz = 17-20 ms/cycle of modulation | |
17-20 ms < 40 ms | |
Somehow the auditory system is getting around the sensitivity-resolution tradeoff |
The auditory system can follow amplitude modulation well up to about |
50-60 Hz | |
120 Hz | |
4 Hz | |
2000 Hz |
So how can we detect such short changes in a sound and still be able to integrate sound energy over 200-300 ms? |
Two theories of temporal resolution-temporal integration discrepancy |
Multiple integrators | |
Multiple looks |
Multiple integrators |
Multiple integrators |
Multiple integrators |
AN fibers donÕt have different integration times |
But of course the integrators could be somewhere else in the brain. |
Multiple looks |
Multiple looks theory says |
we have good temporal resolution because we use memory to integrate sound ÒenergyÓ | |
we have good temporal resolution because we have some neurons that have good temporal resolution and some neurons that donÕt. |
Multiple integrators theory says |
we have good temporal resolution because we use memory to integrate sound ÒenergyÓ | |
we have good temporal resolution because we have some neurons that have good temporal resolution and some neurons that donÕt. |
A test of the multiple looks theory: Viemeister & Wakefield (1991) |
Set up a situation in which the two theories predict different outcomes... |
Viemeister & Wakefield (1991) |
Viemeister & Wakefield (1991) |
Viemeister & Wakefield (1991) |
Viemeister & Wakefield (1991): Results |
The results of Viemeister & Wakefield are most consistent with |
multiple looks theory | |
multiple integrators theory |
Conclusions |
People can detect very short duration changes in sound, such as 2-3 ms long interruptions. | |
People can integrate sound energy over 200-300 ms to improve sound detection. | |
The auditory system gets around the sensitivity-resolution tradeoff by using short-term integration and intelligent central processing. |
Text sources |
Gelfand, S.A. (1998) Hearing: An introduction to psychological and physiological acoustics. New York: Marcel Dekker. | |
Moore, B.C.J. (1997) An introduction to the psychology of hearing. (4th Edition) San Diego: Academic Press. | |
Viemeister, N.F. (1979). Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 66, 1564-1380. | |
Viemeister, N.F. & Wakefield, G. (1991) Temporal integration and multiple looks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 90, 858-865. | |
Yost, W.A. (1994) Fundamentals of hearing: an introduction. San Diego: Academic Press. |
Text sources |
Gelfand, S.A. (1998) Hearing: An introduction to psychological and physiological acoustics. New York: Marcel Dekker. | |
Moore, B.C.J. (1997) An introduction to the psychology of hearing. (4th Edition) San Diego: Academic Press. | |
Viemeister, N.F. (1979). Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 66, 1564-1380. | |
Viemeister, N.F. & Wakefield, G. (1991) Temporal integration and multiple looks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 90, 858-865. | |
Yost, W.A. (1994) Fundamentals of hearing: an introduction. San Diego: Academic Press. |