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 Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the experiments reported here, the amplitude and the latency of human compound action potentials (CAPs) evoked from a chirp stimulus are compared to those evoked from a traditional click stimulus. The chirp stimulus was created with a frequency sweep to compensate for basilar membrane traveling wave delay using the O-Chirp equations from Fobel and Dau [(2004). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 2213-2222] derived from otoacoustic emission data. Human cochlear traveling wave delay estimates were obtained from derived compound band action potentials provided by Eggermont [(1979). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 65, 463-470]. CAPs were recorded from an electrode placed on the tympanic membrane (TM), and the acoustic signals were monitored with a probe tube microphone attached to the TM electrode. Results showed that the amplitude and latency of chirp-evoked N1 of the CAP differed from click-evoked CAPs in several regards. For the chirp-evoked CAP, the N1 amplitude was significantly larger than the click-evoked N1s. The latency-intensity function was significantly shallower for chirp-evoked CAPs as compared to click-evoked CAPs. This suggests that auditory nerve fibers respond with more unison to a chirp stimulus than to a click stimulus.

Click- and chirp-evoked human compound action potentials