scholarly journals A mechatronic approach to supernormal auditory localisation for telepresence

Mechatronics ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (9) ◽  
pp. 501-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.S. Harrison ◽  
G.M. Mair
2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Savel ◽  
Carolyn Drake ◽  
Guy Rabau

Mechatronics ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 803-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin S Harrison ◽  
Gordon M Mair

Acta Acustica ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Pedro Lladó ◽  
Petteri Hyvärinen ◽  
Ville Pulkki

Auditory localisation accuracy may be degraded when a head-worn device (HWD), such as a helmet or hearing protector, is used. A computational method is proposed in this study for estimating how horizontal plane localisation is impaired by a HWD through distortions of interaural cues. Head-related impulse responses (HRIRs) of different HWDs were measured with a KEMAR and a binaural auditory model was used to compute interaural cues from HRIR-convolved noise bursts. A shallow neural network (NN) was trained with data from a subjective listening experiment, where horizontal plane localisation was assessed while wearing different HWDs. Interaural cues were used as features to estimate perceived direction and position uncertainty (standard deviation) of a sound source in the horizontal plane with the NN. The NN predicted the position uncertainty of localisation among subjects for a given HWD with an average estimation error of 1°. The obtained results suggest that it is possible to predict the degradation of localisation ability for specific HWDs in the frontal horizontal plane using the method.


Author(s):  
Agnieszka Stelling-Kończak ◽  
Marjan Hagenzieker ◽  
Jacques J.F. Commandeur ◽  
Martijn J.H. Agterberg ◽  
Bert van Wee

2008 ◽  
Vol 238 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 118-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell L. Martin ◽  
Ken I. McAnally

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara E. Garcia ◽  
Pete R. Jones ◽  
Gary S. Rubin ◽  
Marko Nardini

2005 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Sherry

AbstractOne of Tinbergen's most lasting contributions to the study of behaviour was the distinction he drew between causal, functional, developmental, and evolutionary questions about behaviour. More recently, behavioural ecologists have claimed that understanding the function of behaviour is an important step towards understanding its causes. This claim has, in turn, been criticised for confusing the fundamental distinction that Tinbergen defined. The study of behaviour, however, usually begins by identifying units of behaviour functionally and only then proceeds to causal analysis. Research carried out on four phenomena — disassortative mating by MHC loci, memory for cache sites in food-storing birds, auditory localisation of prey by barn owls, and magnetic orientation — illustrates the contributions made to causal research through understanding the function of behaviour. Understanding function, and sometimes simply a hypothesis about function, defines the causal questions that are asked, identifies novel questions for causal investigation, and sets the criteria that causal explanations must satisfy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document