Transcript Literature review

Instructions for the WG Chair
At Each Meeting, the Working Group Chair shall:
Show slides #1 and #2 of this presentation
Advise the WG membership that:
 The IEEE’s patent policy is consistent with the ANSI patent policy and is
described in Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws;
 Early disclosure of patents which may be essential for the use of standards
under development is encouraged;
 Disclosures made of such patents may not be exhaustive of all patents that
may be essential for the use of standards under development, and that
neither the IEEE, the WG, nor the WG Chairman ensure the accuracy or
completeness of any disclosure or whether any disclosure is of a patent
that, in fact, may be essential for the use of standards under development.
Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG
meeting:
 That the foregoing advice was provided and the two slides were shown;
 That an opportunity was provided for WG members to identify or disclose
patents that the WG member believes may be essential for the use of that
standard;
 Any responses that were given, specifically the patents and patent
applications that were identified (if any) and by whom.
(Not necessary to be shown)
Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – March 2003 (Revised
February 2006)
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
6. Patents
IEEE standards may include the known use of essential patents and patent
applications provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant
with respect to patents whose infringement is, or in the case of patent applications,
potential future infringement the applicant asserts will be, unavoidable in a compliant
implementation of either mandatory or optional portions of the standard [essential
patents]. This assurance shall be provided without coercion. The patent holder or
applicant should provide this assurance as soon as reasonably feasible in the
standards development process. This assurance shall be provided no later than the
approval of the standard (or reaffirmation when a patent or patent application
becomes known after initial approval of the standard). This assurance shall be either:
a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the patentee will not enforce any of its present
or future patent(s) whose use would be required to implement either mandatory or
optional portions of the proposed IEEE standard against any person or entity
complying with the standard; or
b) A statement that a license for such implementation will be made available without
compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that
are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination.
This assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a
minimum, from the date of the standard’s approval to the date of the standard’s
withdrawal.
Slide #1 Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – March 2003 (Revised February 2006)
Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
Don’t discuss the validity/essentiality of patents/patent claims
Don’t discuss the cost of specific patent use
Don’t discuss licensing terms or conditions
Don’t discuss product pricing, territorial restrictions, or market share
Don’t discuss ongoing litigation or threatened litigation
Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed… do formally object.
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee
Administrator at [email protected] or visit
http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html
This slide set is available at
http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt
Slide #2 Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – March 2003 (Revised February 2006)
Payment Notice for Meeting
ASC C63®
Membership Fees
ASC C63 ® incurs costs in the
development of the ANSI standards.
Members must be paid in full for
continues membership.
The chair of this meeting has a list of all
paid members and a form for payment.
Please see the chair if you have any
doubts about the status of your
membership
Meeting Fees
If you are not a member of the
committee or working group you are
required to defray the costs of these
meeting through the payment of a
meeting fee. Please see the chair for
payment.
All meeting attendees MUST be
members in good standing or pay the
meeting fee.
ASC C63® Fees
Membership type
Fee
Voting privileges
Organizational member of ASC C63
$2,500.00 per year
One vote on standards and any
matter before ASC C63
Individual member of ASC C63
$ 500 per year
Individual Subcommittee members
$500.00 per year
Same as organizational member of
ASC C63
One vote only on Subcommittee
matters
Member emeritus of ASC C63
Fees waived
No vote
Individual Working Group members
$500.00 per year
One vote only on Working Group
matters
Observers for any C63 Parent
Committee or Subcommittee meetings
$250.00 per meeting
No vote
Working Group members at working
group meetings or special meetings
called by Subcommittee Chairs
$125.00 per meeting, or
as needed to cover
expenses but not to
exceed $175 per meeting
Vote on Working Group consensus
matters
Observers at Working Group meetings
$100.00 per meeting
No vote
Potential Working Group/observer
attendees of Inaugural meeting of
Working Groups
Fees waived
No vote
Literature Review
7.2 Audio coupling mode
“… audio signal-to-interference ratio of 20 dB
provides a signal quality that is acceptable for
normal operation …” [B41] (= M3)
“At a signal-to interference ratio of 30 dB, 90% of
hearing aid users find the WD highly usable” (= M4)
“… reduction of the signal-to-interference ratio to 10
dB degrades the performance to that which would
generally be judged to be useable but not acceptable
for regular use” (= M2)
[B41] Levitt, H., Kozma-Spytek, L., and Harkins, J., “In-the-ear
measurements of interference in hearing aids from digital wireless
telephones,” Seminars in Hearing, 26(2), pp. 87–98, 2005.
Levitt et al 2005
Exposure: mobile phone in test
transmit mode
Subjects: Volunteers (n = 42)



HLAA (SHHH) members (by mail)
ITE and BTE hearing aids
Mild to severe hearing loss
Test: subjective


Inter-individual variability >25 dB
GSM 50% “highly usable”
= 18.2 dB S/N
Hansen Poulsen (1996)
Scand Audiol 25:227-232
Exposure:


Simulated GSM noise over speech
Not correlated with E-field, just SPL
Subjects: volunteers (n = 17)
Subjective Testing



GSM noise superimposed on speech background
Inter-individual variability >30 dB
GSM 50% “not annoying” = 17 dB S/N
Objective Testing

Word score reached max at 10dB S/N and did not improve
with increased margin
Nabelek et al (2004-2006)
Exposure:

Speech babble background noise – not GSM
Subjects: volunteers (n = 191)

Clinic
Subjective Testing (MCL – BNL recruited from U
Tennessee Audiology = ANL)




MCL = most comfortable speech level (quiet background)
BNL = background noise level (max tolerated)
Inter-individual subjective variability >40 dB
“acceptable” ANL (full- vs part-time HA) = 7.5 vs ~14 dB
Smaller ANL predicted HA success (85% of the time)
EHIMA GSM Project (1993-1994)
Telecon Denmark
Exposure:

GSM Mobile phones placed to users ear
Subjects: volunteers (n = 5)
Hearing aids (n = 5) (i.e., ~ 25 samples)
Subjective Testing
Normal hearing individuals
 GSM 50% “slightly annoying” = 15 dB S/N in
normal environment

Julstrom et al / T-coil
Minimum S/N for a "Usable" Rating
60
50
Display
S/N - dB
40
CDMA
GSM
30
iDEN
20
TDMA
UMTS
10
DSSS
0
FHSS
-10
0%
20%
40%
60%
subjects meeting criteria
80%
100%
U Oklahoma (1996-1999)
Exposure:

Mobile phones in test mode placed to users ear
Subjects: volunteers (n = 78)
Testing
Objective (word recognition)
 Subjective (annoyance)

Interference reported primarily as distance for
interference to occur
Perception of interference increased with
increasing severity of hearing loss
National Acoustics Lab (1995)
Exposure: mobile phone placed to users ear



hooked to network
no make / model / antenna type
phone oriented and positioned to maximize coupling
Subjects: volunteers



both hearing impaired and normal hearing
5 groups of 4-8 volunteers
2 x ITE and 3 x BTE models
Test: interference detection


data presented in terms of field strength, distance, and HA
immunity for “noticeable interference”
Acceptable performance requires HA immunity ~ 28 dB
Summary
Average S/N for acceptable performance from
recent GSM “usability” testing = 15-18 dB
Variability in subjective response (25-40 dB)
Current 20 dB S/N in ANSI C63.19 incorporates >3
dB for testing error
Refinements in testing and predictive modeling may
support a relaxation in M / T limits




~ 3 dB corresponds to testing margin, not limits per se
significant improvement in HA immunity
refinements in testing and predictive modeling
increasing inter-lab consistency in testing
Usability Definitions
(M/T1) Highly Usable—I would use this
phone for almost any call.
(M/T2) Minor Limitations on Use—I would
use this phone for most calls, but it is not
ideal.
(M/T3) Major Limitations on Use—I would
use this phone for a few calls, ‘‘in a pinch.’’
(M/T4) Not Usable—I would not use this
phone for any calls.
Usability Definitions
Are the questions consistent across user
groups




nature of conversation ?
duration ?
demographics (age, occupation, regional location)
do we need to define a more specific use case ?
Is this the most appropriate approach ?


A) does WD + HA combination allow user to hear well ?
B) does WD degrade baseline HA performance ?
HLAA Meeting – Reno Nevada
“Mobile Phones, Hearing Aids, and the ANSI C63.19
Standard to Make Them Work Together”
Friday June 13, 2:15-3:15pm
Confirmed: Harry Levitt, Joe Morrissey, Dave
Preves
Tentative: Dave Case