Deactivating discriminable electrodes controls whether benefit comes from channel count or pitch quality

Evidence

Overall the results demonstrated significant improvements in speech understanding in quiet and noise for re-mapped participants, with no particular test exhibiting the greatest improvements. Cochlear users were less likely to benefit from electrode deactivation than users of the other devices. As speculated earlier it could be that the n-of-m strategies used in the Cochlear device may be less sensitive to channel overlap effects because not all channels are stimulated in each cycle. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2051 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Pitch-based electrode deactivation provides no speech benefit for ACE users — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2050; Electrode deactivation worsens spectral resolution despite unchanged stimulation rate; Electrode deactivation outcomes depend on stimulation rate and filter allocation differences (+3 more)

Related

• Pitch-based electrode deactivation provides no speech benefit for ACE users (similarity 0.93)
• Electrode deactivation outcomes depend on stimulation rate and filter allocation differences (similarity 0.91)
• Cochlear device users benefit less from electrode deactivation than AB and MEDEL users (similarity 0.91)
• Deactivating pitch-indiscriminable cochlear implant electrodes yields no speech benefit (similarity 0.91)
• Electrode deactivation worsens spectral resolution despite unchanged stimulation rate (similarity 0.90)
• Deactivating cochlear electrodes with indistinct pitch responses improves speech perception for most users (similarity 0.89)
• Deactivating multiple implant electrodes can worsen frequency information transmission (similarity 0.89)
• Deactivating electrodes can shift frequency-to-electrode mapping and worsen perception (similarity 0.88)
• Deactivating electrodes improves consonant but worsens vowel perception in ACE users (similarity 0.87)
• Deactivating an electrode shifts frequency-to-electrode allocation and can negate expected benefits. (similarity 0.87)
• Too few channels were deactivated to demonstrate any speech benefit (similarity 0.87)
• Electrode deactivation benefits depend on the sound processing strategy used. (similarity 0.86)
• Pitch-ranking can identify which cochlear implant electrodes are safe to deactivate (similarity 0.86)
• Electrode deactivation benefits CIS users more than ACE or SPEAK users (similarity 0.85)
• Deactivating cochlear implant electrodes harms spectral ripple resolution but spares speech perception (similarity 0.85)

Broader Connections

• Deactivating CI electrodes worsens spectral resolution rather than improving speech perception #complicates (0.85)
• Electrode pairs are judged discriminable only when performance exceeds chance #expands (0.80)
• Cochlear device users benefit less from electrode deactivation than AB and MEDEL users #expands (0.75) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 2051