{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01730103806228374, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0034602076124567475, 'mean_word_length': 5.206008583690987, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants.

OBJECTIVE
One goal was to determine for normal-hearing listeners the number of channels of stimulation necessary to achieve a high level of speech understanding. The second goal was to determine whether patients with a six-channel cochlear implant could achieve the same level of speech understanding as normal-hearing subjects listening to speech processed through six channels.


METHODS
Speech signals were processed, for normal-hearing listeners, either in the manner of cochlear-implant processors with 2-9 fixed channels, or in the manner of a processor which picked, on each update cycle, 6 of 16 channels.


RESULTS
For the most difficult test material eight fixed channels were necessary to achieve the level of performance achieved with the "n of m" processor. Some cochlear implant patients with a six-channel continuous interleaved sampling processor achieved the same level of performance as normal-hearing subjects listening to speech via six channels.


CONCLUSIONS
A signal processor for cochlear implants with eight channels should produce the same level of intelligibility as a processor with many more channels. Processors using continuous interleaved sampling technology can provide a signal which results in the same level of speech understanding as normal, acoustic stimulation.