Silent Speech Interfaces for Speech Restoration: A Review

This work was supported in part by the Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI) under Grant PID2019-108040RB-C22/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. The work of Jose A. Gonzalez-Lopez was supported in part by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under Juan de la Cierva-Incorporation Fellowship (IJCI-2017-32926).This review summarises the status of silent speech interface (SSI) research. SSIs rely on non-acoustic biosignals generated by the human body during speech production to enable communication whenever normal verbal communication is not possible or not desirable. In this review, we focus on the first case and present latest SSI research aimed at providing new alternative and augmentative communication methods for persons with severe speech disorders. SSIs can employ a variety of biosignals to enable silent communication, such as electrophysiological recordings of neural activity, electromyographic (EMG) recordings of vocal tract movements or the direct tracking of articulator movements using imaging techniques. Depending on the disorder, some sensing techniques may be better suited than others to capture speech-related information. For instance, EMG and imaging techniques are well suited for laryngectomised patients, whose vocal tract remains almost intact but are unable to speak after the removal of the vocal folds, but fail for severely paralysed individuals. From the biosignals, SSIs decode the intended message, using automatic speech recognition or speech synthesis algorithms. Despite considerable advances in recent years, most present-day SSIs have only been validated in laboratory settings for healthy users. Thus, as discussed in this paper, a number of challenges remain to be addressed in future research before SSIs can be promoted to real-world applications. If these issues can be addressed successfully, future SSIs will improve the lives of persons with severe speech impairments by restoring their communication capabilities.Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI) PID2019-108040RB-C22/AEI/10.13039/501100011033Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under Juan de la Cierva-Incorporation Fellowship IJCI-2017-3292

Neurolinguistics Research Advancing Development of a Direct-Speech Brain-Computer Interface

A direct-speech brain-computer interface (DS-BCI) acquires neural signals corresponding to imagined speech, then processes and decodes these signals to produce a linguistic output in the form of phonemes, words, or sentences. Recent research has shown the potential of neurolinguistics to enhance decoding approaches to imagined speech with the inclusion of semantics and phonology in experimental procedures. As neurolinguistics research findings are beginning to be incorporated within the scope of DS-BCI research, it is our view that a thorough understanding of imagined speech, and its relationship with overt speech, must be considered an integral feature of research in this field. With a focus on imagined speech, we provide a review of the most important neurolinguistics research informing the field of DS-BCI and suggest how this research may be utilized to improve current experimental protocols and decoding techniques. Our review of the literature supports a cross-disciplinary approach to DS-BCI research, in which neurolinguistics concepts and methods are utilized to aid development of a naturalistic mode of communication. : Cognitive Neuroscience; Computer Science; Hardware Interface Subject Areas: Cognitive Neuroscience, Computer Science, Hardware Interfac

Retainer-Free Optopalatographic Device Design and Evaluation as a Feedback Tool in Post-Stroke Speech and Swallowing Therapy

Stroke is one of the leading causes of long-term motor disability, including oro-facial impairments which affect speech and swallowing. Over the last decades, rehabilitation programs have evolved from utilizing mainly compensatory measures to focusing on recovering lost function. In the continuing effort to improve recovery, the concept of biofeedback has increasingly been leveraged to enhance self-efficacy, motivation and engagement during training. Although both speech and swallowing disturbances resulting from oro-facial impairments are frequent sequelae of stroke, efforts to develop sensing technologies that provide comprehensive and quantitative feedback on articulator kinematics and kinetics, especially those of the tongue, and specifically during post-stroke speech and swallowing therapy have been sparse. To that end, such a sensing device needs to accurately capture intraoral tongue motion and contact with the hard palate, which can then be translated into an appropriate form of feedback, without affecting tongue motion itself and while still being light-weight and portable. This dissertation proposes the use of an intraoral sensing principle known as optopalatography to provide such feedback while also exploring the design of optopalatographic devices itself for use in dysphagia and dysarthria therapy. Additionally, it presents an alternative means of holding the device in place inside the oral cavity with a newly developed palatal adhesive instead of relying on dental retainers, which previously limited device usage to a single person. The evaluation was performed on the task of automatically classifying different functional tongue exercises from one another with application in dysphagia therapy, whereas a phoneme recognition task was conducted with application in dysarthria therapy. Results on the palatal adhesive suggest that it is indeed a valid alternative to dental retainers when device residence time inside the oral cavity is limited to several tens of minutes per session, which is the case for dysphagia and dysarthria therapy. Functional tongue exercises were classified with approximately 61 % accuracy across subjects, whereas for the phoneme recognition task, tense vowels had the highest recognition rate, followed by lax vowels and consonants. In summary, retainer-free optopalatography has the potential to become a viable method for providing real-time feedback on tongue movements inside the oral cavity, but still requires further improvements as outlined in the remarks on future development.:1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Goals and contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Scope and limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 Basics of post-stroke speech and swallowing therapy 2.1 Dysarthria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2 Dysphagia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3 Treatment rationale and potential of biofeedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.4 Summary and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3 Tongue motion sensing 3.1 Contact-based methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.1 Electropalatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.2 Manometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.1.3 Capacitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3.2 Non-contact based methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.2.1 Electromagnetic articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.2.2 Permanent magnetic articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3.2.3 Optopalatography (related work) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.3 Electro-optical stomatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.4 Extraoral sensing techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.5 Summary, comparison and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4 Fundamentals of optopalatography 4.1 Important radiometric quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.1 Solid angle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.2 Radiant flux and radiant intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.3 Irradiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.4 Radiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.2 Sensing principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4.2.1 Analytical models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.2.2 Monte Carlo ray tracing methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.2.3 Data-driven models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.4 Model comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4.3 A priori device design consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.3.1 Optoelectronic components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.3.2 Additional electrical components and requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 4.3.3 Intraoral sensor layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5 Intraoral device anchorage 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.1.1 Mucoadhesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 5.1.2 Considerations for the palatal adhesive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2.1 Polymer selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2.2 Fabrication method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 5.2.3 Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.4 PEO tablets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.5 Connection to the intraoral sensor’s encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.6 Formulation evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 5.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.3.1 Initial formulation evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.3.2 Final OPG adhesive formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6 Initial device design with application in dysphagia therapy 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 6.2 Optode and optical sensor selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.2.1 Optode and optical sensor evaluation procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 6.2.2 Selected optical sensor characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.2.3 Mapping from counts to millimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.2.4 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.3 Device design and hardware implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.1 Block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.2 Optode placement and circuit board dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.3 Firmware description and measurement cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 6.3.4 Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 6.3.5 Fully assembled OPG device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 6.4 Evaluation on the gesture recognition task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 6.4.1 Exercise selection, setup and recording . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 6.4.2 Data corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6.4.3 Sequence pre-processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6.4.4 Choice of classifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.4.5 Training and evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 6.4.6 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 6.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 7 Improved device design with application in dysarthria therapy 7.1 Device design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 7.1.1 Design considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 7.1.2 General system overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 7.1.3 Intraoral sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 7.1.4 Receiver and controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 7.1.5 Multiplexer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 7.2 Hardware implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 7.2.1 Optode placement and circuit board layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 7.2.2 Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 7.3 Device characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 7.3.1 Photodiode transient response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 7.3.2 Current source and rise time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 7.3.3 Multiplexer switching speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 7.3.4 Measurement cycle and firmware implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 7.3.5 In vitro measurement accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 7.3.6 Optode measurement stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 7.4 Evaluation on the phoneme recognition task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7.4.1 Corpus selection and recording setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7.4.2 Annotation and sensor data post-processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7.4.3 Mapping from counts to millimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 7.4.4 Classifier and feature selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 7.4.5 Evaluation paradigms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 7.5 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 7.5.1 Tongue distance curve prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 7.5.2 Tongue contact patterns and contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 7.5.3 Phoneme recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 7.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 8 Conclusion and future work 115 9 Appendix 9.1 Analytical light transport models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 9.2 Meshed Monte Carlo method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 9.3 Laser safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 9.4 Current source modulation voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 9.5 Transimpedance amplifier’s frequency responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 9.6 Initial OPG device’s PCB layout and circuit diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 9.7 Improved OPG device’s PCB layout and circuit diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 9.8 Test station layout drawing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Bibliography 152Der Schlaganfall ist eine der häufigsten Ursachen für motorische Langzeitbehinderungen, einschließlich solcher im Mund- und Gesichtsbereich, deren Folgen u.a. Sprech- und Schluckprobleme beinhalten, welche sich in den beiden Symptomen Dysarthrie und Dysphagie äußern. In den letzten Jahrzehnten haben sich Rehabilitationsprogramme für die Behandlung von motorisch ausgeprägten Schlaganfallsymptomatiken substantiell weiterentwickelt. So liegt nicht mehr die reine Kompensation von verlorengegangener motorischer Funktionalität im Vordergrund, sondern deren aktive Wiederherstellung. Dabei hat u.a. die Verwendung von sogenanntem Biofeedback vermehrt Einzug in die Therapie erhalten, um Motivation, Engagement und Selbstwahrnehmung von ansonsten unbewussten Bewegungsabläufen seitens der Patienten zu fördern. Obwohl jedoch Sprech- und Schluckstörungen eine der häufigsten Folgen eines Schlaganfalls darstellen, wird diese Tatsache nicht von der aktuellen Entwicklung neuer Geräte und Messmethoden für quantitatives und umfassendes Biofeedback reflektiert, insbesondere nicht für die explizite Erfassung intraoraler Zungenkinematik und -kinetik und für den Anwendungsfall in der Schlaganfalltherapie. Ein möglicher Grund dafür liegt in den sehr strikten Anforderungen an ein solche Messmethode: Sie muss neben Portabilität idealerweise sowohl den Kontakt zwischen der Zunge und dem Gaumen, als auch die dreidimensionale Bewegung der Zunge in der Mundhöhle erfassen, ohne dabei die Artikulation selbst zu beeinflussen. Um diesen Anforderungen gerecht zu werden, wird in dieser Dissertation das Messprinzip der Optopalatographie untersucht, mit dem Schwerpunkt auf der Anwendung in der Dysarthrie- und Dysphagietherapie. Dies beinhaltet auch die Entwicklung eines entsprechenden Gerätes sowie dessen Befestigungsmethode in der Mundhöhle über ein dediziertes Mundschleimhautadhäsiv. Letzteres umgeht das bisherige Problem der notwendigen Anpassung eines solchen intraoralen Gerätes an einen einzelnen Nutzer. Für die Anwendung in der Dysphagietherapie erfolgte die Evaluation anhand einer automatischen Erkennung von Mobilisationsübungen der Zunge, welche routinemäßig in der funktionalen Dysphagietherapie durchgeführt werden. Für die Anwendung in der Dysarthrietherapie wurde eine Lauterkennung durchgeführt. Die Resultate bezüglich der Verwendung des Mundschleimhautadhäsives suggerieren, dass dieses tatsächlich eine valide Alternative zu den bisher verwendeten Techniken zur Befestigung intraoraler Geräte in der Mundhöhle darstellt. Zungenmobilisationsübungen wurden über Probanden hinweg mit einer Rate von 61 % erkannt, wogegen in der Lauterkennung Langvokale die höchste Erkennungsrate erzielten, gefolgt von Kurzvokalen und Konsonanten. Zusammenfassend lässt sich konstatieren, dass das Prinzip der Optopalatographie eine ernstzunehmende Option für die intraorale Erfassung von Zungenbewegungen darstellt, wobei weitere Entwicklungsschritte notwendig sind, welche im Ausblick zusammengefasst sind.:1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Goals and contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Scope and limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 Basics of post-stroke speech and swallowing therapy 2.1 Dysarthria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2 Dysphagia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3 Treatment rationale and potential of biofeedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.4 Summary and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3 Tongue motion sensing 3.1 Contact-based methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.1 Electropalatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.2 Manometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.1.3 Capacitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3.2 Non-contact based methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.2.1 Electromagnetic articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.2.2 Permanent magnetic articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3.2.3 Optopalatography (related work) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.3 Electro-optical stomatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.4 Extraoral sensing techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.5 Summary, comparison and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4 Fundamentals of optopalatography 4.1 Important radiometric quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.1 Solid angle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.2 Radiant flux and radiant intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.3 Irradiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.4 Radiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.2 Sensing principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4.2.1 Analytical models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.2.2 Monte Carlo ray tracing methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.2.3 Data-driven models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.4 Model comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4.3 A priori device design consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.3.1 Optoelectronic components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.3.2 Additional electrical components and requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 4.3.3 Intraoral sensor layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5 Intraoral device anchorage 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.1.1 Mucoadhesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 5.1.2 Considerations for the palatal adhesive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2.1 Polymer selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2.2 Fabrication method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 5.2.3 Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.4 PEO tablets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.5 Connection to the intraoral sensor’s encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.2.6 Formulation evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 5.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.3.1 Initial formulation evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.3.2 Final OPG adhesive formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6 Initial device design with application in dysphagia therapy 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 6.2 Optode and optical sensor selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.2.1 Optode and optical sensor evaluation procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 6.2.2 Selected optical sensor characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.2.3 Mapping from counts to millimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.2.4 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.3 Device design and hardware implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.1 Block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.2 Optode placement and circuit board dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6.3.3 Firmware description and measurement cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 6.3.4 Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 6.3.5 Fully assembled OPG device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 6.4 Evaluation on the gesture recognition task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 6.4.1 Exercise selection, setup and recording . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 6.4.2 Data corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6.4.3 Sequence pre-processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6.4.4 Choice of classifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.4.5 Training and evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 6.4.6 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 6.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 7 Improved device design with application in dysarthria therapy 7.1 Device design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 7.1.1 Design considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 7.1.2 General system overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 7.1.3 Intraoral sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 7.1.4 Receiver and controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 7.1.5 Multiplexer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 7.2 Hardware implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A Silent-Speech Interface using Electro-Optical Stomatography

Sprachtechnologie ist eine große und wachsende Industrie, die das Leben von technologieinteressierten Nutzern auf zahlreichen Wegen bereichert. Viele potenzielle Nutzer werden jedoch ausgeschlossen: Nämlich alle Sprecher, die nur schwer oder sogar gar nicht Sprache produzieren können. Silent-Speech Interfaces bieten einen Weg, mit Maschinen durch ein bequemes sprachgesteuertes Interface zu kommunizieren ohne dafür akustische Sprache zu benötigen. Sie können außerdem prinzipiell eine Ersatzstimme stellen, indem sie die intendierten Äußerungen, die der Nutzer nur still artikuliert, künstlich synthetisieren. Diese Dissertation stellt ein neues Silent-Speech Interface vor, das auf einem neu entwickelten Messsystem namens Elektro-Optischer Stomatografie und einem neuartigen parametrischen Vokaltraktmodell basiert, das die Echtzeitsynthese von Sprache basierend auf den gemessenen Daten ermöglicht. Mit der Hardware wurden Studien zur Einzelworterkennung durchgeführt, die den Stand der Technik in der intra- und inter-individuellen Genauigkeit erreichten und übertrafen. Darüber hinaus wurde eine Studie abgeschlossen, in der die Hardware zur Steuerung des Vokaltraktmodells in einer direkten Artikulation-zu-Sprache-Synthese verwendet wurde. Während die Verständlichkeit der Synthese von Vokalen sehr hoch eingeschätzt wurde, ist die Verständlichkeit von Konsonanten und kontinuierlicher Sprache sehr schlecht. Vielversprechende Möglichkeiten zur Verbesserung des Systems werden im Ausblick diskutiert.:Statement of authorship iii Abstract v List of Figures vii List of Tables xi Acronyms xiii 1. Introduction 1 1.1. The concept of a Silent-Speech Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Structure of this work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Fundamentals of phonetics 7 2.1. Components of the human speech production system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2. Vowel sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. Consonantal sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4. Acoustic properties of speech sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5. Coarticulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.6. Phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.7. Summary and implications for the design of a Silent-Speech Interface (SSI) . . . . . . . 21 3. Articulatory data acquisition techniques in Silent-Speech Interfaces 25 3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.2. Scope of the literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.3. Video Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.4. Ultrasonography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.5. Electromyography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.6. Permanent-Magnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3.7. Electromagnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.8. Radio waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.9. Palatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.10.Conclusion and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4. Electro-Optical Stomatography 55 4.1. Contact sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2. Optical distance sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.3. Lip sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4.4. Sensor Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 4.5. Control Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.6. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5. Articulation-to-Text 99 5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.2. Command word recognition pilot study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.3. Command word recognition small-scale study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6. Articulation-to-Speech 109 6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.2. Articulatory synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.3. The six point vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.4. Objective evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.5. Perceptual evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 6.6. Direct synthesis using EOS to control the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 6.7. Pitch and voicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7. Summary and outlook 145 7.1. Summary of the contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 7.2. Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 A. Overview of the International Phonetic Alphabet 151 B. Mathematical proofs and derivations 153 B.1. Combinatoric calculations illustrating the reduction of possible syllables using phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 B.2. Signal Averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.3. Effect of the contact sensor area on the conductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.4. Calculation of the forward current for the OP280V diode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 C. Schematics and layouts 157 C.1. Schematics of the control unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 C.2. Layout of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 C.3. Bill of materials of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 C.4. Schematics of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 C.5. Layout of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 C.6. Bill of materials of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 D. Sensor unit assembly 169 E. Firmware flow and data protocol 177 F. Palate file format 181 G. Supplemental material regarding the vocal tract model 183 H. Articulation-to-Speech: Optimal hyperparameters 189 Bibliography 191Speech technology is a major and growing industry that enriches the lives of technologically-minded people in a number of ways. Many potential users are, however, excluded: Namely, all speakers who cannot easily or even at all produce speech. Silent-Speech Interfaces offer a way to communicate with a machine by a convenient speech recognition interface without the need for acoustic speech. They also can potentially provide a full replacement voice by synthesizing the intended utterances that are only silently articulated by the user. To that end, the speech movements need to be captured and mapped to either text or acoustic speech. This dissertation proposes a new Silent-Speech Interface based on a newly developed measurement technology called Electro-Optical Stomatography and a novel parametric vocal tract model to facilitate real-time speech synthesis based on the measured data. The hardware was used to conduct command word recognition studies reaching state-of-the-art intra- and inter-individual performance. Furthermore, a study on using the hardware to control the vocal tract model in a direct articulation-to-speech synthesis loop was also completed. While the intelligibility of synthesized vowels was high, the intelligibility of consonants and connected speech was quite poor. Promising ways to improve the system are discussed in the outlook.:Statement of authorship iii Abstract v List of Figures vii List of Tables xi Acronyms xiii 1. Introduction 1 1.1. The concept of a Silent-Speech Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Structure of this work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Fundamentals of phonetics 7 2.1. Components of the human speech production system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2. Vowel sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. Consonantal sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4. Acoustic properties of speech sounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.5. Coarticulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.6. Phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.7. Summary and implications for the design of a Silent-Speech Interface (SSI) . . . . . . . 21 3. Articulatory data acquisition techniques in Silent-Speech Interfaces 25 3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.2. Scope of the literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.3. Video Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.4. Ultrasonography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.5. Electromyography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.6. Permanent-Magnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3.7. Electromagnetic Articulography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.8. Radio waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.9. Palatography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.10.Conclusion and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4. Electro-Optical Stomatography 55 4.1. Contact sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2. Optical distance sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.3. Lip sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4.4. Sensor Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 4.5. Control Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.6. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5. Articulation-to-Text 99 5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.2. Command word recognition pilot study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.3. Command word recognition small-scale study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6. Articulation-to-Speech 109 6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.2. Articulatory synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.3. The six point vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.4. Objective evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.5. Perceptual evaluation of the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 6.6. Direct synthesis using EOS to control the vocal tract model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 6.7. Pitch and voicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7. Summary and outlook 145 7.1. Summary of the contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 7.2. Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 A. Overview of the International Phonetic Alphabet 151 B. Mathematical proofs and derivations 153 B.1. Combinatoric calculations illustrating the reduction of possible syllables using phonotactics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 B.2. Signal Averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.3. Effect of the contact sensor area on the conductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 B.4. Calculation of the forward current for the OP280V diode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 C. Schematics and layouts 157 C.1. Schematics of the control unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 C.2. Layout of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 C.3. Bill of materials of the control unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 C.4. Schematics of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 C.5. Layout of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 C.6. Bill of materials of the sensor unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 D. Sensor unit assembly 169 E. Firmware flow and data protocol 177 F. Palate file format 181 G. Supplemental material regarding the vocal tract model 183 H. Articulation-to-Speech: Optimal hyperparameters 189 Bibliography 19

超音波検査を用いた嚥下音産生機序の解明

Background: Cervical auscultation is a technique frequently used for the screening of dysphagia. However, this method is difficult to evaluate objectively and it is unclear how sound is generated during the swallowing process. The aim of this study was to analyze the waveform of swallowing sound and clarify the sound production process using recordings of swallowing sounds and ultrasound images (USI), performed simultaneously. Materials and Methods: Commercial natural spring water and natural carbonated water were used in experiments 1 and 2, respectively. In experiment 1, a microphone was attached to the skin of the neck of 20 young participants and swallowing sounds were recorded and analyzed. In experiment 2, swallowing processes in three participants were recorded by a medical ultrasonography apparatus. The ultrasonic probe was placed on the skin over one of the thyroid cartilages or the thyroid gland. Results: The swallowing sound wave (SSW) was divided into three sectional periods. The mean duration of the first, second, and third SSW was 210 ± 147 ms, 458 ± 113 ms, and 91 ± 61 ms, respectively. The mean intensity ratio of the first, second, and third SSW was 7.8 ± 5.2, 29.2 ± 16.5, and 5.8 ± 5.1, respectively. When the ultrasonic probe was placed on the skin over one of the thyroid cartilages, in the phase between the production of the second SSW and the silent period, the USI revealed an accumulation of swallowed material around the valleculae and oropharynx. In the silent period of the second SSW, the swallowed material accumulated around the hypopharynx. When the ultrasonic probe was placed on the skin over the thyroid gland, in the silent period of the second SSW, the USI revealed that the swallowed material had passed through esophagus. Conclusion: Waveform and USI findings from this study suggest that swallowing sound can be divided into three sectional periods: an oral phase, a pharyngeal phase, and a repositioning phase

Adaptive threshold optimisation for colour-based lip segmentation in automatic lip-reading systems

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in ful lment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Johannesburg, September 2016Having survived the ordeal of a laryngectomy, the patient must come to terms with the resulting loss of speech. With recent advances in portable computing power, automatic lip-reading (ALR) may become a viable approach to voice restoration. This thesis addresses the image processing aspect of ALR, and focuses three contributions to colour-based lip segmentation. The rst contribution concerns the colour transform to enhance the contrast between the lips and skin. This thesis presents the most comprehensive study to date by measuring the overlap between lip and skin histograms for 33 di erent colour transforms. The hue component of HSV obtains the lowest overlap of 6:15%, and results show that selecting the correct transform can increase the segmentation accuracy by up to three times. The second contribution is the development of a new lip segmentation algorithm that utilises the best colour transforms from the comparative study. The algorithm is tested on 895 images and achieves percentage overlap (OL) of 92:23% and segmentation error (SE) of 7:39 %. The third contribution focuses on the impact of the histogram threshold on the segmentation accuracy, and introduces a novel technique called Adaptive Threshold Optimisation (ATO) to select a better threshold value. The rst stage of ATO incorporates -SVR to train the lip shape model. ATO then uses feedback of shape information to validate and optimise the threshold. After applying ATO, the SE decreases from 7:65% to 6:50%, corresponding to an absolute improvement of 1:15 pp or relative improvement of 15:1%. While this thesis concerns lip segmentation in particular, ATO is a threshold selection technique that can be used in various segmentation applications.MT201

Aerospace Medicine and Biology: A continuing bibliography with indexes (supplement 167)

This bibliography lists 235 reports, articles, and other documents introduced into the NASA scientific and technical information system in April 1977