English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Forward and reverse cochlear latency and its relation to the frequency tuning of the auditory filters can be assessed using tone bursts (TBs). Otoacoustic emissions (TBOAEs) estimate the cochlear roundtrip time, while auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) to the same stimuli aim at measuring the auditory filter buildup time. Latency ratios are generally close to two and controversy exists about the relationship of this ratio to cochlear mechanics. We explored why the two methods provide different estimates of filter buildup time, and ratios with large inter-subject variability, using a time-domain model for OAEs and ABRs. We compared latencies for twenty models, in which all parameters but the cochlear irregularities responsible for reflection-source OAEs were identical, and found that TBOAE latencies were much more variable than ABR latencies. Multiple reflection-sources generated within the evoking stimulus bandwidth were found to shape the TBOAE envelope and complicate the interpretation of TBOAE latency and TBOAE/ABR ratios in terms of auditory filter tuning.

Relating the variability of tone-burst otoacoustic emission and auditory brainstem response latencies to the underlying cochlear mechanics