[0001] The present specification relates to a method of adjusting processing parameters
in hearing aids, in particular in a binaural hearing aid system with a first hearing
aid and a second hearing aid, each of which comprises a microphone, an A/D converter
for provision of a digital input signal in response to sound signals received at the
respective microphone in a sound environment, a processor that is adapted to process
the digital input signals in accordance with a predetermined signal processing algorithm
to generate a processed output signal, and a D/A converter and an output transducer
for conversion of the respective processed sound signal to an acoustic output signal.
[0002] The hearing aids typically comprise a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) for processing
of sound received by the hearing aid for compensation of the user's hearing loss.
As is well known in the art, the processing of the DSP is controlled by a signal processing
algorithm having various parameters for adjustment of the actual signal processing
performed. The gains in each of the frequency channels of a multi-channel hearing
aid are examples of such parameters.
[0003] The flexibility of the DSP may be utilized to provide a plurality of different algorithms
and/or a plurality of sets of parameters of a specific algorithm. For example, various
algorithms may be provided for noise suppression, i.e. attenuation of undesired signals
and amplification of desired signals. Desired signals are usually speech or music,
and undesired signals can be background speech, restaurant clatter, music (when speech
is the desired signal), traffic noise, etc.
[0004] The different algorithms or parameter sets provide comfortable and intelligible reproduced
sound quality in different sound environments, such as speech, babble speech, restaurant
clatter, music, traffic noise, etc. Audio signals obtained from different sound environments
may possess very different characteristics, e.g. average and maximum sound pressure
levels (SPLs) and/or frequency content. In the hearing aid, each type of sound environment
may be associated with a particular program wherein a particular setting of algorithm
parameters of a signal processing algorithm provides processed sound of optimum signal
quality in a specific sound environment. A set of such parameters may typically include
parameters related to broadband gain, corner frequencies or slopes of frequency-selective
filter algorithms and parameters controlling e.g. knee-points and compression ratios
of Automatic Gain Control (AGC) algorithms.
[0005] The hearing aids may be provided with a number of different programs, each program
tailored to a particular sound environment category and/or particular user preferences.
Signal processing parameters may initially be determined during a fitting session
in a dispenser's office and programmed into the instrument by activating corresponding
algorithms and algorithm parameters in a non-volatile memory area of the hearing aid
and/or transmitting corresponding algorithms and algorithm parameters to the non-volatile
memory area.
[0006] When a hearing impaired user is wearing a left and a right hearing aid, it is often
desired that the hearing aids operate in a somehow synchronized manner. The questions
are: how much synchronization is desired, what type of synchronization is desired
and in which circumstances does one need which type of synchronization. A complicating
issue is that it may be difficult to predefine the desired synchronization after a
fitting session, since preferences concerning the symmetry of the binaural hearing
aid system may be depending on environment, may be changing throughout the usage period,
or may simply be hard to predefine based on a laboratory fitting procedure.
[0007] A recent study, published as "
Online Personalization of Hearing Instruments," EURASIP Journal on Audio, Speech,
and Music Processing, vol. 2008, Article ID 183456, 14 pages, 2008. doi:10.1155/2008/183456,
by Alexander Ypma, Job Geurts, Serkan Özer, Erik van der Werf, and Bert de Vries, where a group of 10 hearing impaired users were asked to personalize a noise reduction
parameter on both instruments revealed that some participants had a preference to
asymmetry in the binaural hearing aid system.
[0008] Currently in order to configure a binaural hearing aid system a user need to adjust
both the left and the right hearing aid individually. This two-sided user interaction
with the hearing aid system is contemplated to be a burden on the user.
[0009] Left and right hearing aids may communicate with each other, e.g. via a wireless
link between the hearing aids. With such a configuration one could use the combined
knowledge on symmetric and asymmetric left-right preferences by synchronizing the
hearing aids in an asymmetric way, i.e. benefit from the ease of synchronization,
but at the same time allowing asymmetric preferences.
[0010] Additionally, a model for asymmetric hearing loss and/or preferences may be used
for predicting asymmetric parameter changes. Furthermore, user adjustments to one
of the hearing aids could be used to infer adjustments to the other instrument in
the binaural hearing aid system or even to update the settings of the binaural hearing
aid system based on only partial (left- or right instrument) input.
[0011] A first aspect of the present invention provides a method of adjusting a signal processing
parameter for a first and a second hearing aid forming part of a binaural hearing
aid system to be worn by a user, the binaural hearing aid system comprising a user
specific model representing a desired asymmetry between the first ear and the second
ear of the user , the method comprising the steps of:
- detecting a request for a processing parameter change at the first hearing aid,
- adjusting the signal processing parameter in the first hearing aid in response to
the request,
- adjusting a processing parameter for the second hearing aid in response to the request
and based on the user specific model.
[0012] The method may further comprise the step of adapting the model with respect to the
desired asymmetry during use of the binaural hearing aid system.
[0013] The step of adapting the model may be performed subsequent to the step of adjusting
a processing parameter for the second hearing aid and in response to a second request
for processing a parameter change at the second hearing aid. For example, the user
may not be satisfied with a new adjustment of the processing parameter for the second
hearing aid and reacts by manually adjusting the second hearing aid by the second
request. Preferably, the manual adjustment is incorporated into the model only if
it is performed within a short predefined time interval after the step of adjusting
the processing parameter for the second hearing aid, i.e. the second request may be
performed within a predefined time interval subsequent to the adjusting the processing
parameter for the second hearing aid.
[0014] The step of adapting the model may include modifying the asymmetry behaviour to the
observed sound environment. For example, the step of adapting the model may be based
on statistically processed environmental data. For example, a certain setting of processing
parameters for the first and second hearing aids may represent a certain compromise
that may depend on the type of sound environments in which the user typically spends
time as indicated by the statistically processed environmental data.
[0015] The step of detecting may include recording a signal or request for change of parameter,
e.g. via a hardware interrupt or other signalling means.
[0016] When a person operates one of the hearing aids via some control, e.g. an actuator
such as a control wheel (e.g. a volume wheel), a push button, a toggle switch or a
remote device that controls the hearing aid, the method according to the present invention
synchronizes the other hearing aid with the first hearing aid, but preferably not
by simply copying the same adjustment to the other hearing aid. The method according
to the present invention ensures that differences in preferences and hearing loss
in the two ears are taken into account. The model may be based on measurements by
e.g. audiogram or some derivative thereof like PTA. PTA is pure tone average i.e.
the average of pure tone hearing thresholds at e.g. 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz.
[0017] The role of a first and a second hearing aid may be played interchangeably by both
the left and right hearing aid in a binaural hearing aid system.
[0018] The model used in the method according to the first aspect of the present invention
may be a frequency dependent model. This may be advantageous as hearing loss may not
be uniform in the entire frequency spectrum or over a given frequency interval.
[0019] It is understood that the term hearing loss may be construed to mean hearing loss
in the first and/or second ear. In other embodiments the term hearing loss may be
construed to mean the difference in the hearing losses between the first and second
ear and may possibly also include other type of data that e.g. may reflect any desired
asymmetry.
[0020] In the method according to the present invention a request for change of processing
parameter is detected. The request may originate from one of several events or a combination
of events, including but not limited to operation of a wheel on one of the hearing
aids, a push-button on one of the hearing aids, operation of a remote control controlling
or communicating with one or both of the hearing aids, a device or circuit monitoring
ambient sound or any combinations hereof.
[0021] For example, the binaural hearing aid system may be capable of automatically classifying
the user's sound environment into one of a number of relevant or typical everyday
sound environment categories, such as speech, babble speech, restaurant clatter, music,
traffic noise, etc.
[0022] Obtained classification results may be utilised in the respective hearing aid to
automatically select signal processing characteristics of the hearing aid, e.g. to
automatically switch to the most suitable algorithm for the environment in question.
Such a hearing aid will be able to maintain optimum sound quality and/or speech intelligibility
for the individual hearing aid user in various sound environments.
[0023] As an example, it may be desirable to switch between an omni-directional and a directional
microphone preset program in dependence of, not just the level of background noise,
but also on further signal characteristics of this background noise. In situations
where the user of the hearing aid communicates with another individual in the presence
of the background noise, it could be beneficial to be able to identify and classify
the type of background noise. Omni-directional operation could be selected in the
event that the noise being traffic noise to allow the user to clearly hear approaching
traffic independent of its direction of arrival. If, on the other hand, the background
noise was classified as being babble-noise, the directional listening program could
be selected to allow the user to hear a target speech signal with improved signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) during a conversation.
[0024] Sound characteristics may differ significantly at the two ears of a user, and it
will occur that sound environment determination at the two ears of a user differs,
and this may leads to desired different signal processing of sounds for each of the
ears of the user.
[0025] The request is processed and the corresponding parameter, or parameters, is adjusted
in the first hearing aid. A corresponding adjustment of the second hearing aid is
calculated, predicted or determined on the basis of the request and by using a model
or rule representing the hearing loss and/or preferences of the second ear. The processing
parameter for the second hearing aid is then adjusted accordingly.
[0026] The method according to the present invention make use of prior knowledge on the
hearing loss in each ear and other audiological or psychophysical prior knowledge
and environmental information in doing the synchronized adjustment in an asymmetric
manner.
[0027] It is an advantage of the present invention that the signal processing parameter
in the first hearing aid may be adjusted based on the request for processing parameter
change and further by using a further specific model representing the hearing loss
of the first ear of the wearer. This allow the hearing aid processing parameter of
the first hearing aid to be adjusted using a model or rule representing the hearing
loss both in the first ear as well as in the second ear. When synchronizing the level
of steering parameters an advantage of the present invention is that constraining
identical steering parameters on both sides of the hearing aid system can still be
looked upon as asymmetric synchronization. This is because asymmetry between left
and right hearing aid parameters may be caused by different acoustic fields at the
two ears. Steering parameters are parameters that govern the computation of hearing
aid processing parameters from environmental descriptors like sound features or sound
classification outputs. Steering parameters may also be parameters that relate sound
environment to hearing aid processing parameters. These may not be fixed to a certain
value. The steering parameters may furthermore be modifiable in such a way that the
values of the hearing aid parameter(s) in a certain environment reflect the user preference
as well as possible
[0028] Also, the user has to operate only one of the hearing aids, whereas both hearing
aids are adjusted in a manner that is tailored to the left and right hearing loss.
[0029] As mentioned above, the request for processing parameter change may originate from
a wearer initiated operation of an actuator or may be generated in response to changes
in signal characteristics. The hearing aid may include circuitry for detecting the
ambient sound environment, such as present sound environment conditions, such as noisy
conditions e.g. due to wind noise or noise originating from surrounding speech or
other ambient noise sources.
[0030] In some embodiments the processing parameter may be volume level, but other parameters
may be used, such as equalizing parameters, sound classification parameters, noise
reduction parameters, noise reduction, compression ratio, time constants, parameters
of classifier module, beamforming (directional processing) parameters, feedback suppression
parameters, dynamic range compression parameters and the like. Furthermore, hyperparameters
may be controlled or changed. A hyperparameter is not a hearing aid processing parameter
as such. It is a parameter that governs the working of a processing algorithm, and
is typically fixed to a certain value.
[0031] It is a particular advantage of the present invention that the model may be adapted
in response to the request for processing parameter change. If a user or wearer is
subjected to a particular environment situation and adjusts the hearing aid accordingly
the model or rule may be adjusted or modified in response to that change request.
This is contemplated to reduce the number of times a wearer needs to adjust a hearing
aid, thereby possibly increasing the wearer satisfaction with the hearing aid.
[0032] It is further advantageous that the method according to the present invention provides
the possibility that the request for processing parameter change may comprise information
regarding one or more processing parameters to be changed and a parameter representing
an amount of change. The request may comprise information regarding which parameter
or parameters to change as well as the amount of change of that parameter or parameters,
e.g. an amount of increase or decrease of volume.
[0033] In one embodiment of the present invention the first hearing aid may be a master
device and the second hearing aid may be a slave device. This allows a user to make
a change at the first, master, hearing aid alone and the change will then be transferred
or imposed on the second, slave, device. It is further possible that both hearing
aids may assume the role of the master device, but not at the same time, in the meaning
that both devices may receive change requests and subsequently transfer or apply the
change to the other device.
[0034] In one advantageous embodiment of the present invention the model may comprise two
separate steering vectors each associated with a hearing loss in the first and second
ear of the user, respectively, which steering vectors are coupled by a probability
model representing the combined binaural system.
[0035] In another advantageous embodiment of the method according to the first aspect the
overall degree of asymmetry may further depend on the difference between microphone
recordings in the first and second hearing aid.
[0036] According to the present invention the model representing the hearing loss of the
user may comprise a measured or estimated hearing loss in the first and/or second
ear of the user. This may be advantageous when hearing loss is not identical in the
two ears.
[0037] In a still further advantageous embodiment of the present invention the request for
processing parameter change may originate from a user initiated operation of an actuator
or is generated in response to changes in signal characteristics. The request may
e.g. originate from a volume wheel or other interaction means operated by a user.
[0038] It is presently preferred that the method according to the first aspect of the present
invention is not performed in a fitting situation. The fitting situation is usually
performed by a technician e.g. at a laboratory or clinic. The method according to
the present invention is preferably in use while the wearer is in any situation any
other person would be, e.g. work, leisure situations such as dinners at restaurants,
also larger groups of people gathered.
[0039] The method is preferably implemented in a hearing aid to be used by a wearer in any
noisy situation where hearing impaired persons otherwise would feel discomfort without
the hearing aid.
[0040] The request may be based on a vector of parameters. The models of the first and the
second hearing aid may be a shared or common parameter or parameter set or vector.
[0041] A second aspect of the present invention relates to a hearing aid comprising a signal
processor, wherein the hearing aid is adapted for forming part of a binaural hearing
aid system during use and for receiving information from another hearing aid that
during use also is adapted to form part of the binaural hearing aid system, wherein
the signal processor is configured to adjust a signal processing parameter in the
hearing aid based on a request for a processing parameter change in the other hearing
aid and a user specific model representing a desired asymmetry between the first ear
and the second ear of the user.
[0042] The signal processor may further be configured to adjust the user specific model
in response to the request.
[0043] The hearing aid according to the second aspect may further be configured or adapted
to perform any of the steps mentioned in relation to the method according to the first
aspect of the present invention.
[0044] The model may be placed in the first hearing aid or it may be placed in the second
hearing aid. The model may however in an alternative embodiment be placed in a third
device, such as a remote control, a personal portable device such as a body worn device
or a PDA, Personal Data Assistant, a mobile/cellular phone or the like.
[0045] In an embodiment of the invention the model may be shared between the first and the
second hearing aid in such a way that some parts of the model are placed in the first
hearing aid and some parts are placed in the second hearing aid. For example in one
embodiment those parts of the model that relate to the hearing loss in the ear that
is to be compensated with the first hearing aid are placed in the first hearing aid,
while those parts of the model that relate to the hearing loss in the ear that is
to be compensated by the second hearing aid are placed in the second hearing aid.
[0046] In another embodiment these parts of the model may be overlapping, and in some embodiments
be totally overlapping, i.e. the first and the second hearing aid may both be equipped
with the same model in the case of extreme overlap.
[0047] Below the invention will be described in more detail with reference to the exemplary
embodiments illustrated in the drawings, wherein
Fig. 1 schematically illustrate a simplistic drawing of a binaural hearing aid system,
Fig. 2 is a schematic illustration of a flow diagram illustrating the steps of a first
embodiment of the present invention.
Fig. 3 is an alternative illustration of the first embodiment of the present invention
Fig. 4 is a schematic illustration of a modified first embodiment of the method according
to the present invention
Fig. 5 schematically illustrate a second embodiment of the present invention
Fig. 6 shows essentially the same configuration as shown in Fig. 1
Fig. 7 shows an embodiment of the present invention, wherein either one of the two
hearing aids may assume the role of master device,
Figs. 8A, 8B and 8C are schematic illustrations of a simulation of the second embodiment
of the present invention,
Fig. 9 is a schematic illustration of a third embodiment of the present invention,
Fig. 10 is a schematic illustration of a modified version of the third embodiment,
Fig. 11 is a schematic illustration of a fourth embodiment of the present invention,
Fig. 12 is a schematic illustration of a sixth embodiment
Figs. 13 and 14 are schematic illustrations of hearing loss of a person.
[0048] The present invention will now be described more fully hereinafter with reference
to the accompanying figures, in which exemplary embodiments of the invention are shown.
The invention may, however, be embodied in different forms and should not be construed
as limited to the embodiments set forth herein. Rather, these embodiments are provided
so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete, and will fully convey the scope
of the invention to those skilled in the art. The figures are schematic and simplified
for clarity, and they merely show details which are essential to the understanding
of the invention, while other details have been left out. Throughout, the same reference
numerals are used for identical or corresponding parts.
[0049] Fig. 1 illustrates a simplistic block diagram of a binaural hearing aid 2. The binaural
hearing aid 2 comprises two separate hearing aids 4 and 6 that are adapted or configured
to communicate with each other. Each of the hearing aids 4, 6 are equipped with an
input transducer 8, 10, e. g. a microphone and/or a telecoil (not shown), for the
provision of an electrical input signal. The hearing aid 4, 6 also comprises an audio
signal processor such as a compressor 12, 14, a volume control 16, 18, and an output
transducer 20, 22 such as a receiver. The binaural hearing aid 2 in Fig. 1 is shown
in a master slave configuration, wherein an adjustment of the volume control 16 on
the master hearing aid 4 is followed by an automatic adjustment of the volume of the
second hearing aid 6 in dependence of a model, indicated by processing block 24, of
the hearing loss of the user. In this example the adjustment of a hearing aid processing
parameter of the master hearing aid is an adjustment of volume, however, it is to
be understood that it may be any other kind of hearing aid processing parameter, and
the adjustment of one kind of processing parameter in the master hearing aid 4 is
not necessarily followed by an adjustment of the same kind of hearing aid parameter
(in this example also a volume adjustment in the slave hearing aid 6) in the slave
hearing aid 6. Furthermore, it is to be understood that the adjustment of the processing
parameter (in this example the volume) in the master hearing aid may be triggered
automatically, e.g. by an automatic change of program in the master hearing aid. This
automatic change of program may for example be triggered by a change in the ambient
acoustic environment of the binaural hearing aid 2. The model processing block 24
may be incorporated in either one of the two hearing aids 4 or 6. It is understood
that in this embodiment the volume control 18 of the slave hearing aid 6 is optional.
[0050] Fig. 2 is a schematic illustration of a flow diagram illustrating steps of a first
embodiment of the present invention.
[0051] The method according to the present invention relates to adapting, adjusting or changing
signal parameters in a binaural hearing aid system. The binaural hearing aid system
comprises two hearing aids, one for the left ear and one for the right ear of a wearer
or user. In the present specification the two hearing aids are referred to as the
first and the second hearing aid. The left and the right hearing aid may assume the
role of the first and the second hearing aids in different situations. When one of
the hearing aids is operated or receives a request to change a processing parameter
this hearing aid is referred to as the first hearing aid, the other is then synchronized
in an asymmetric manner. This other hearing aid is then referred to as the second
hearing aid.
[0052] A request for change of a processing parameter is received 26. The request comprises
an indication of which processing parameter to change. In certain embodiments the
request may comprise indication of several parameters. In addition to the identification
of the parameter, the request may comprise an indication of an amount of change of
the parameter.
[0053] The request for change of a processing parameter may be generated by one of several
devices or units. Usually one or both the hearing aids in a binaural hearing aid system
comprise a volume wheel. This volume wheel may generate a request for change of a
processing parameter. This request may be accompanied by an indication of the amount
that the processing parameter should change.
[0054] The method further comprises adjusting 28 the signal processing parameter in the
first hearing aid. In one embodiment of the present invention the processing parameter
is changed or modified at the first hearing aid directly, i.e. without regards to
hearing loss in the first ear.
[0055] The method also comprises determining 30 a processing parameter change for the second
hearing aid based on the request for processing parameter change and a specific model
32 wherein the model represents hearing loss of the second ear of the user and/or
preferred asymmetry in first and second ear according to the individual user's preferences.
[0056] This is contemplated to be advantageous as it is assumed that the user desires to
change processing parameters in the first ear based on the user's perception of sounds
at the first ear and therefore operates e.g. a volume wheel at the first ear.
[0057] In an embodiment, the method according to the present invention provides automatic
change or adaptation of a processing parameter for the second ear based on the request
for a parameter change for the first ear and a model for the hearing loss for the
second ear. In a specific embodiment of the invention the method provides automatic
change or adaptation the same processing parameter for the second ear based on the
request for the parameter change for the first ear and a model for the hearing loss
for the second ear. The model for the second ear is preferably a frequency dependent
model.
[0058] Examples of asymmetrical hearing loss include different loudness perception, i.e.
different amount of recruitment or hyperacusis L-R (where L-R denotes left-right)
resulting in one or more of different threshold level, different most comfortable
level (MCL level), different uncomfortable levels (UCL levels) or during fitting a
L-R level mapping could be selected or measured.
[0059] Also, asymmetrical SNR loss might impact the L-R mapping curve, e.g. with respect
to comfort or intelligibility preference. This seems difficult to predict and points
to experiments or measurements during fitting.
[0060] The method also comprises the step of changing or adapting one or more signal processing
parameter in the second hearing aid. The calculation or determination of the signal
processing parameter change for the first and/or second hearing aid may be performed
in either hearing aid. In some embodiments of binaural hearing aids both hearing aids
comprises signal processing units. The signal processing parameter may be set in one
hearing aid and then transmitted to the other hearing aid. One example of this is
a binaural hearing aid system where the two hearing aids are in communication via
a wireless connection, such as Bluetooth or another suitable protocol. Alternatively
the two hearing aids may be connected by an electrical conductor.
[0061] Fig. 3 illustrates an embodiment of a binaural hearing aid system, wherein the system
uses asymmetric synchronization of left and right hearing aid parameters.
[0062] In an advantageous embodiment the model or transfer function between the two hearing
aids of the binaural hearing aid system may provide a non-linear or asymmetric transfer
function of changes made at one hearing aid to the other hearing aid.
[0063] Advantageously if the user controls only the first hearing aid, the second hearing
aid may be synchronized, in an asymmetric manner, with the first. For the majority
of listening situations, this may be perfectly acceptable for the user.
[0064] For example, if a user operates the volume wheel of one of the hearing aids in a
binaural hearing aid system and has audibility ranges that are different for the left
ear and the right ear, volume change for the second hearing aid may be different from
the volume change in the first hearing aid leading to the same perceived increase
or decrease in loudness for both ears. In such cases, embodiments of the system described
herein allows automatic adjustment of the second hearing aid based on the operation
performed on the volume wheel, and a model representing the difference in audibility
ranges for the user. Thus, the user does not need to individually adjust each of the
two hearing aids.
[0065] In some embodiments the system may be configured for computing the magnitude of the
overall gain change, due to the volume adjustment, in the first ear relative to the
audibility range in the first ear and then issuing a gain change in the second ear
that has the same magnitude relative to the audibility range in the second ear.
[0066] Throughout figures 3 to 12 subscripts L and R refer to left and right, respectively.
In figure 3 left and right incoming sound, denoted with x, is processed by hearing
aids
HA that output processed sound
y.
[0067] This output sound y is input to the left and right ear E, transformed into left and
right auditory nerve signals n, which are combined in the brain, where it is observed,
integrated, and evaluated. Based on such a binaural integration and evaluation of
the processed left and right sound, a user may make a decision d to adjust left and/or
right hearing aids.
[0068] This will lead to an adjustment, which will constitute a correction r to be issued
in some way to the hearing aid(s).
[0069] The learning modules L learn and apply a mapping from user corrections r via a prescribed
rule. In the case that a correction or adjustment r is issued at only one of the instruments
in the binaural hearing aid system, the rule computes the optimal hearing aid processing
parameter θ in the adjusted instrument and at the other instrument given a binaural
utility model U. In the simplest case, such a utility model passes information about
the left and right hearing loss
HLL and
HLR of the patient to the model or rule. In general, the utility model may include an
auditory profile α that includes information regarding left and/or right hearing loss
and may also include other parameters that reflect aspects of the user's hearing loss,
sound appreciation and/or life style. A utility model may also include utility parameters
ω. The learning modules may contain parameters β that govern the mapping from adjustments
to parameters. In this first embodiment, the rule governs the computation of left
and right processing parameters in the learning modules, indicated by the arrows from
Rule to Learning modules. Choices for the fixed mapping
f(.) are represented by some setting of the parameters β, governed by the rule. In other
embodiments the mapping may not be fixed and may be variable.
[0070] The behaviour may be modelled for this example with update equations

where the outputs

and

are the parameter (column) vectors of the left and right hearing aid at consent time
k,

and

are the previous values of the left and right hearing aid parameter vector and

is the user correction vector to the left hearing aid at time
k. Furthermore,

is some (possibly nonlinear) scaling of the left hearing aid user correction vector
that is applied to the right ear, and takes into account the hearing loss in both
ears. In practice, the hearing aid parameter vectors are typically one-dimensional,
but when a suitable user correction vector

with more than one dimension can be supplied by the user, a multi-dimensional parameter
vector can also be synchronized asymmetrically.
[0071] In this embodiment time stamp t is defined as the ongoing time, measured e.g. in
multiples of the sampling period 1/Fs, where Fs is the sampling frequency of the digital
hearing aid processor.
[0072] Also consent time k is defined as the time stamp
tk at which an explicit consent was given by the user to a certain adjustment. The user
operates a control function (a wheel, a push button, a remote control, or some other
user control interface) in order to influence the sound processing function of the
hearing aid. The time at which the user releases the user control (and leaves it unchanged
for a certain amount of time) is called a consent moment. Consent moment k refers
to the k-th time that the control is released (and left unchanged). In some embodiments
when performing asymmetric synchronization of user adjustments to a control, the system
is configured to act at consent moments. The left and right hearing aid parameter
vectors at consent time k from equation (1) are applied inside the hearing aid system
as new processing parameters any time between the current consent moment
k and the next consent moment
k+
1, i.e. updated

and

are used as

and

at time stamps between
tk and
tk+1. Similar rules are used for converting updated steering parameters at consent times
to arbitrary time stamps during on-line processing of incoming sound.
[0073] In one embodiment one may choose the nonlinear scaling function as

where the scale(.) function scales the adjustment in the left hearing aid according
to the left hearing loss, and the scaleback(.) function uses this 'perceptually scaled
adjustment' to compute the adjustment according to the right hearing loss. The right
hearing aid parameter is thus synchronized with the left, but using a modified left
hearing aid correction, allowing for asymmetry between the hearing aids. Further,
only one correction issued to the left hearing aid is used to correct both hearing
aids, which avoids operating two controls, which is contemplated to be a benefit to
the user.
[0074] An alternative implementation or embodiment could make use of the update equations

[0075] The nonlinear scaling again applies the left hearing aid correction such that the
perceived change in the left hearing aid is similar to the perceived change in the
right hearing aid. However apart from hearing loss in both ears now the function also
takes into account the previous value of the right hearing aid parameter vector. The
additional user correction in the right hearing aid

will usually be zero, but the user is allowed to perform an additional fine tuning
at the right hearing aid, if needed. In some embodiments the additional user correction
may be learned by or absorbed in the model representing the hearing loss in an ear
thereby improving future adjustments based on the model.
[0076] Note that in the above examples the left hearing aid plays the role of the first
hearing aid, but the roles may be exchanged. For example in other embodiments the
right hearing aid may play the role of the first hearing aid.
[0077] In other embodiments, different controls for expressing parameter adjustments and
different models to compute the best modified change in the other ear from the adjustment
in the first ear and the hearing loss in both ears are also contemplated.
[0078] The flow diagram presented in Figs. 2 and 3 relate to the above embodiments.
[0079] Fig. 4 is a schematic illustration of a modified first embodiment of the method according
to the present invention. Fig. 4 comprises similar steps as in Fig. 2, similar steps
has been numbered with similar reference numerals.
[0080] In addition to the steps in Fig. 2, the method illustrated in Fig. 4 includes the
box 36. This is to indicate the use of a hearing loss model of the first ear when
performing or calculating the adjustment of the processing parameter or processing
parameters for the first hearing aid.
[0081] A second embodiment of the present invention provides synchronizing left and right
steering parameters using asymmetric user feedback and asymmetric acoustic features.
This second embodiment is illustrated in Fig. 5.
[0082] The idea of asymmetric synchronization may be extended by introducing left and right
hearing aid sound feature (row) vectors

and

These vectors will steer the parameters of both hearing aids via a set of weighting
coefficients, or steering parameters, β
t that are shared between both hearing aids, e.g. using the mapping

[0083] This system of equations expresses that the left and right (scalar) hearing aid processing
parameters are changing with the acoustic environment (as represented by left and
right sound feature vectors

and

) using a shared steering vector φ.
[0084] Further, user adjustments

and

are added to the environmentally steered parts

and

In this embodiment we will consider scalar hearing aid parameter vectors

and

but this does not limit the application of the ideas behind the embodiment to the
one-dimensional case, because in an alternative embodiment of the invention, asymmetric
synchronization of multidimensional parameter vectors could be used as well.
[0085] Note that we do not specify how user adjustments

and

change with time. E.g. as a result of a learning step

on the basis of an adjustment to the left aid at consent time k, we may discount
the adjustment as

at time stamp τ at which the learning step is applied. We may leave the adjustment
unchanged otherwise (hence the only way that the adjustment is modified is by user
interaction).
[0086] One component in each of the sound feature vectors may be set to 1, hereby providing
an environment-independent bias. The user is allowed to operate either of the hearing
aids, or both of them, which will result in either a left user correction

a right user correction

or a combination of left and right user correction. The shared steering vector β
may e.g. be predefined by using prior knowledge about hearing loss, user preferences,
etc.
[0087] Additionally, an on-line learning method may be designed that incorporates the user
corrections and updates the common weighting vector. In the present context the term
on-line is construed as meaning during usage of the hearing instrument, as opposed
to off-line, i.e. during a fitting session at a dispenser's office or the like. Hence,
the binaural hearing aid system is synchronized at the level of the steering parameters,
but the actual hearing aid parameters that result from this steering may differ between
the ears when the features differ and/or when the user corrections differ between
the ears. More specifically, it is proposed to use a linear Gaussian model for the
hearing aid parameters, also called 'the output model', as

where the

and

are zero mean Gaussian noise sources with variance

and

respectively, which represent the noise in the user adjustments at consent time k.
Note that in the model, the φ
k term is a stochastic variable that represents the current steering vector, which
is used to estimate/update the shared steering vector φ that is applied in the hearing
aid processing.
[0088] We model asymmetric adjustment errors and intrinsic user inconsistencies with noise
sources, which are Gaussian stochastic variables with, possibly, different mean and
covariance matrix. Further,

and φ
k are time-varying stochastic variables, where we take

as scalars and φ
k as vector. As mentioned before extensions to include multidimensional

can be made according to an alternative embodiment of the invention.
[0089] A binaural moment of explicit consent k now refers to a certain 'synchronization
time window' starting at time
stamp tk. Here a user releases the control at either or both of the hearing aids to modify
the hearing aid parameter and then leaves the released control value(s) untouched
for a certain period of time. During such a binaural consent moment (referred to hereafter
as just 'consent moment'), the desired hearing aid parameter values are at least partly
known, and the acoustic features may always retrieved in both hearing aids of the
hearing aid system. To model changing user preferences, we assume e.g. that an evolution
of the parameters, i.e. 'the state model', may be modelled as e.g.

where ξ
k is zero-mean Gaussian noise with covariance matrix Γ
k that represents uncertainty in the evolution of the state (i.e. steering) variablesφ
k. At each consent moment we may now update the steering parameters by computing the
posterior mean of the state variables e.g. by using the Kalman filter update formulas.
Other appropriate formulas may also be used. E.g. special cases of this model are
updates obtained with recursive least-squares or normalized least-mean-squares. When
corrections to
both hearing aids have been issued during the synchronization time window, the 'binaural
output vector'

is fully observed along with the 'binaural acoustic feature vector'

and standard update formulas may be used. Under for example a Bayesian framework
we may derive the following:
[0091] With N(µ,Σ) we denote a normal distribution with mean µ and covariance matrix Σ.
[0092] When only one of the corrections is present, the output vector is only partially
observed, i.e. the entries corresponding to the desired parameters of the other hearing
aid are not observed. We may learn from such 'partial evidence' by integrating out
the hidden part of the output vector. The update equations follow the Kalman filter
update equations, but when we have partial evidence we may integrate over the hidden
part of the output vector, leading to slightly different update equations. For example,
when we only observe a user action

to the right instrument of the binaural hearing aid system, we will make a recursive
estimate of the posterior
P(φ
k|
θ1,,...,
θk) using only the right instrument user action:

[0093] When only a user action on the left instrument is observed, the same equations hold,
but with the R superscript replaced by a superscript
L. With

we denote the transposed of the acoustic feature vector at consent time k at the
right instrument, i.e. the transposed of

[0094] Since we have different variance terms

and

for the left and right user actions, on-line tracking of these terms may lead to
different estimates for the consistency in the left and right user actions. An asymmetry
in the left and right consistency based on prior expectations (e.g. when the subject
is left-handed, he may experience less inconsistency in his left actions) can be put
in e.g. as an asymmetry in the initial values

and

[0095] Special cases of this model are updates obtained with recursive least-squares or
normalized least-mean-squares, which are implemented readily by a person skilled in
the art based on this disclosure.
[0096] From the above, it can be noticed that one can make recursive estimates of the posterior
over the steering parameters based on either a left, a right or a joint left-right
adjustment at a certain consent moment. Hence, we synchronize the left and right instruments
of the binaural hearing aid system on the level of the shared steering parameters,
but allow for asymmetry in the adjustments or asymmetric consistency of adjustments.
[0097] A flow diagram of this further embodiment is presented in Fig. 5.
[0098] In addition to figure 2, the possibly noisy adjustment(s) are considered as a joint
left-right adjustment to the hearing aid system and will be applied to both hearing
aids by taking the noise in left and/or right adjustments into account. Furthermore,
the learning and steering modules L learn and apply a mapping from sound feature vectors
s to hearing aid parameters θ. A particular kind of sound feature is the identity
feature, in which case the parameter learning and steering is effectively training
and applying a personalized value for the hearing aid parameter vector. The environmental
sound features are extracted by a feature extraction unit
FE per hearing aid, based on monaural environmental knowledge. These features may be
combined and adapted for each hearing aid using binaural environmental knowledge in
a binaural feature extraction unit
FELR, which then leads to 'binaurally optimized' monaural feature vectors σ. Examples of
relevant acoustic features are: RMS value of input, probability of speech, signal-to-noise
ratio, signal-to-noise-ratio weighted by the band-importance function for speech,
environmental classifier output, etc.
[0099] Incorporating the user adjustment(s) in the hearing aid system is visualized in Fig.
5 as the two arrows containing an adjustment
r from the adjustment box
AD. An initial asymmetry is put into the system by estimates of the prior inconsistency
in left and right user adjustments Σ
0 using the binaural utility model U. Since this is prior information rather than an
on-going flow of information, the arrows from utility model to Learning modules are
dotted. However, these initial estimates influence the mapping of adjustments to processing
parameters, via parameter learning and steering modules L, which are sharing a common
(synchronized) steering vector β.
[0100] The following relates to a simulation of the second embodiment of the present invention,
and is illustrated in Figs. 8A, 8B and 8C.
[0101] In the simulation, a piece of music is digitized, processed by an artificial hearing
aid and played to an artificial user. Based on a model for the desired steering coefficients,
and assuming that the artificial user has access to the same sound features as the
artificial hearing aid, the user will issue corrections to either left, right or both
hearing aids if the annoyance threshold for the corresponding ear is exceeded.
[0102] The annoyance threshold is predefined for each ear, and may be different for each
ear. A current amount of annoyance is determined on the basis of the difference between
desired and currently realized steering coefficients in either ear. Further, the amount
of user inconsistency, i.e. the noise added to the ideal correction(s) when they are
issued, may be different for each ear, hence simulating asymmetric dexterities. Finally,
the acoustic feature values may be (very) different in each ear, hence simulating
different sound fields in both ears, giving rise to different left and right feature
values.
[0103] Fig. 8A, 8B and 8C schematically illustrate learning common steering coefficients
from asymmetric user inputs and asymmetric acoustic features
[0104] The simulation result will now be discussed by referring to each of the figures 8A,
8B and 8C with their row number as indicated in the Figs. 8A-8C, the row with reference
numeral 42 being the first subfigure and the row with reference numeral 52 being the
last subfigure. In all of the rows, the horizontal axis denotes sample number, in
other words: time.
[0105] Each sample corresponds to a sample of the music signal that is played to the artificial
user. During playing, the desired (common) steering parameter α
t, which is a scalar. A one-dimensional feature vector for each of the hearing aids
is assumed for simplicity. In Fig. 8A the parameter varies according to the line 54.
It is seen that the estimated value β
t (referred to in the caption of the subfigure as
theta) 'tracks' the values of the desired parameter α
t very well, in only a few updates.
[0106] Each plotted circle 56A-56J denotes one update step, and after each transition of
α
t a few updates, shown by a few almost overlapping circles at each transition, suffices
to adapt to the new desired value.
[0107] In the second row 44 the noise in the user corrections changes with time and is also
very different per ear, a high value denotes high correction noise or inconsistency,
solid line 58 is left ear, dotted line 60 is right ear. In the middle two rows 46,
48 the annoyance thresholds for both ears is shown, high values denote high thresholds.
[0108] When playing the music, we start with a segment with a low annoyance threshold in
the left ear, i.e. annoyance with already small deviations from desired steering parameter
value. The annoyance threshold for the right ear is quite high, so user corrections
to the right hearing aid will only be issued with very large deviations or variations
of the steering parameter. The annoyance thresholds are then reversed in the second
segment, so corrections to the right hearing aid will be issued more easily than corrections
to the left hearing aid, low for both ears in the third segment, high for both ears
in the fourth segment, and finally equal again to the first segment.
[0109] Now we may see which user corrections have given rise to the tracking behaviour shown
in the first row. The first transition in the desired steering parameter α
t is learned from a few user corrections issued in the left hearing aid, around time
sample 130, shown as the small peak 62 in row 50, which denotes a set of noisy corrections
issued to the left hearing aid. During the time samples around sample 130, there are
no corrections issued to the right hearing aid, which may be seen from the graph of
the right user corrections which is flat at zero during these time samples.
[0110] The transition around time sample 1300 in row 52 on the other hand is tracked from
the user corrections issued to the right hearing aid. Recall that the annoyance threshold
for the right ear in this section is now low, so corrections to the right hearing
aid will be issued more easily than corrections to the left hearing aid. The same
is true for the transition around time sample 1800.
[0111] During the third segment, the transition around time sample 2400 is tracked by user
corrections in both hearing aids. The following three transitions are so large that
all of them exceed the threshold of both ears, and corrections are issued in both
ears as well. Finally, the more subtle transitions in the fifth segment are only causing
annoyance in the left ear and the tracking is done on the basis of the left user corrections.
[0112] What is not seen from this figure is the asymmetry between the features over the
hearing aids, i.e. the same feature extraction procedure was applied to the music
signal for both hearing aids, but the feature values in the left hearing aid were
distorted with quite some noise and then taken as the right hearing aid feature values.
[0113] From the above described simulation it becomes clear that a common steering parameter
vector may be tracked using full or partial evidence from left and right user corrections
with different inconsistencies, and using different feature values in both ears. Hence,
user feedback may be issued asymmetrically in the hearing aids, and the symmetry in
the hearing aid parameter steering will depend on the symmetry in the acoustic fields
in the ears. Further it depends on the symmetry in the extracted acoustic features.
Since the hearing aids share a common steering vector, similar acoustic fields give
rise to similar steered hearing aid parameter vectors, and vice versa.
[0114] The learning procedure may deal with full and/or partial evidence, and since the
user inconsistency may be tracked in each of the hearing aids and the step size of
the learning rule is inversely proportional to the estimated user inconsistency, feedback
from the 'more consistent ear' will give larger contributions to the tracking than
the feedback from the 'more noisy ear', which is preferred. Therefore, the above described
embodiment is a truly asymmetric mechanism for hearing aid synchronization.
[0115] The following describe a third embodiment that uses the idea of synchronization at
the level of the steering parameters

and

rather than at the level of the hearing aid parameters

and

The third embodiment is illustrated in Fig. 9.
[0116] However, in this third embodiment the synchronization will occur at the level of
hyperparameters of the steering parameters, in order to allow for asymmetric steering
parameters as well. In other words, one could synchronize the parameters that control
the distribution over left and right steering parameters, rather than synchronize
the steering parameters themselves.
[0117] The left and right steering parameters are coupled via a common probability model,
which includes left and right hearing loss, but possibly also a user preference function.
The rationale is that the user will perceive the hearing aid parameter settings as
more preferable if they are synchronized after taking into account the 'natural asymmetry'
in the overall hearing aid system. This will partly depend on the asymmetry in the
hearing loss, but may also be subject to considerations like asymmetric fitting of
hearing aids for allowing more central (cerebral) processing of left and right hearing
aid outputs.
[0118] Hence this embodiment provides a method using knowledge of prior asymmetric distribution
on the steering parameters by using the asymmetry in the hearing loss and heuristics
from approaches to asymmetric fitting. Without additional user corrections, this prior
distribution will dictate the binaural steering; additional, possibly asymmetric,
user corrections are used to update the common probability model over the steering
parameters using a Bayesian framework, leading to, on-line updated, posterior means
over the steering parameters

and

[0119] More specifically, the following factorized output model is assumed

where the acoustic feature vectors may contain a 'constant' feature component, to
account for a left bias and/or a right bias, and hearing aid parameters

and

and steering parameters

and

are again stochastic variables. Left and right output noise

and

which model user inconsistency, is again modelled as Gaussian stochastic variables
with possibly different mean and covariance matrix.
[0120] The left and right branches of the model are coupled by imposing a binaural asymmetry
model on e.g. the steering parameters. For example, we may propose that the steering
parameters, which are again considered to be stochastic variables, on the left and
right hearing aids are conditionally dependent on 'prior asymmetry knowledge', represented
by a distribution

[0121] The prior asymmetry knowledge is represented with a 'binaural utility function'
U(ω
,α) that may incorporate some asymmetric fitting methodology represented by the left
and right utility parameters ω and/or by some model of the preferred asymmetry (a
user preference model) represented by the 'user asymmetry parameters'α. Note that
left and right hearing loss will be part of the user asymmetry parameters.
[0122] Using Bayesian techniques it is e.g. possible to compute most likely or maximum a
posteriori steering parameters given such a binaural asymmetry model and 'observations'
α about the user's hearing loss, life style, further auditory profile, etc. Further,
Bayesian techniques allow for updating the prior binaural asymmetry model when (possibly
asymmetric) user adjustments are applied to the binaural hearing aid system, and modified
posterior means of the steering parameters may be used for on-line environmental steering.
[0123] Note that by using a common utility model for both hearings aids in a binaural hearing
aid system, the left and right steering parameters

and

are not free to move, but restricted in a soft way to be similar to some degree.
As a limiting case, one could even put direct (hard) constraints on difference that
is allowed in the left and right steering parameters. More 'restrictive' binaural
utility models will encourage more synchronized steering parameters, and vice versa.
Learning actions take place as a result of adjustments applied to one or both hearing
aids. Via an update (learning action) in the utility model as a result of these adjustments
and/or via adapting the restriction on left and right steering parameters, this may
lead to updated left and right steering parameters and hence parameters in both hearing
aids.
[0124] A flow diagram of the above described embodiment is presented in Fig. 9. One difference
compared to Fig. 5 is in the solid arrows from utility model to Learning modules.
These arrows represent an ongoing flow of information about the current (left and
right) utility of the experienced sound
y. Another difference is that the solid arrows from the
AD unit that represent ongoing flow of user adjustments
r are now fed to the binaural utility model rather than to the Learning modules. It
may be seen that the Learning modules are now updated on the basis of left and right
utilities rather than left and right adjustments.
[0125] For example, if an adjustment r is made to one of the hearing aids, the amount of
preferred asymmetry in the binaural utility model may be updated based on the new
observation. From the updated utility values u, left and right steering parameters
are modified as well.
[0126] The present invention also includes variations of the third embodiment where the
utilities u are combined using some way of restricting the left and right steering
parameters, i.e. a binaural parameter model, that is in turn parameterized by a vector
ξ. A flow diagram of this modified version of the third embodiment is now presented
and illustrated in Fig. 10.
[0127] In addition to figure 9, we now put direct restrictions on the left and right steering
parameters via a binaural parameter model. The nature of the restriction (allowing
for considerable asymmetry or perhaps fully synchronizing the steering parameters)
is modified under influence of (modified) utilities u (the solid arrow from binaural
utility model to binaural parameter model). Furthermore, the restriction due to the
binaural parameter may influence both Learning modules L, denoted by the bidirectional
(dotted) arrows from Learning modules to binaural parameter model.
[0128] A fourth embodiment of our invention describes a master-slave configuration.
[0129] Fig. 6 shows essentially the same configuration as shown in Fig. 1. However, in this
embodiment the model 24 is updated due to a change in a signal processing parameter
at the second hearing aid after a change in a signal processing parameter at the first
hearing aid have caused an automatic update of the signal processing parameter at
the second hearing aid.
[0130] As before the hearing aid 4 is the master, and hearing aid 6 is the slave. Like before,
an adjustment of the volume control 16 is followed by an adjustment of the volume
of the hearing aid 6 according to the model 24. However, if the user is not satisfied
with this adjustment and corrects it by a subsequent adjustment of the volume control
18, then this active indication of dissent with the adjustment suggested by the model
24 may be used to update the model 24. This is indicated with the dashed arrow 38.
[0131] Preferably, the adjustment of volume control 18 is only incorporated into the model
24, if it is performed in a short predefined time interval after the adjustment of
the volume control 16, because otherwise it is probably not occasioned by the first
adjustment of the volume control 16, but more probably occasioned by a change in the
acoustic environment.
[0132] Fig. 7 schematically illustrates a configuration, wherein either one of the two hearing
aids in a binaural hearing aid system may function as a master.
[0133] The update or modification of the model as illustrated in Figs. 6 and 7 may be influenced
by the ambient sound environment. The binaural hearing aid system may detect which
type of ambient sound environment the user is in at any given time. If, e.g. noisy
conditions are detected, the users desire to change the signal processing parameters
could be influenced by the ambient sound environment. The model and/or the signal
processing parameters may be changed automatically in response to a change in the
ambient sound environment.
[0134] At each instance that the user or wearer changes a signal processing parameter, the
model for either ear may be adapted or modified. This is illustrated in Fig. 7 by
the dashed arrows 38 and 40.
[0135] A fifth embodiment relates to switching between different synchronization modes in
addition to the embodiments one to four.
[0136] In addition to the above discussed features of the embodiments one to four, the embodiments
may also comprise a discrete 'synchronization mode' variable, that controls the 'overall
amount of asymmetry' in the binaural hearing aid system.
[0137] As an example, a 'high' value of the synchronization mode variable will constrain
the steering parameters to be very similar, 'medium' and 'low' values will allow more
deviations and finally 'off' will not synchronize the adjustments among the ears.
The latter may e.g. be beneficial when picking up the phone (where the binaural hearing
aid system should e.g. behave in an asynchronous mode). The value of the synchronization
mode variable may be input by the user (e.g. by pressing a push button), but may also
be tracked on-line. The above learning mechanisms should then be extended to incorporate
a discrete mode switching variable this may for example be obtained by adopting switching
Kalman filters for tracking the mode variable and the steering variables simultaneously.
In Fig. 12, the synchronization mode switch is present as an asymmetry mode switch
variable S that acts on 'binaurally optimized' monaural feature vectors σ. However,
note that also the user may influence the mode switch directly (using e.g. a push
button or a remote control). The arrow from the Binaural integration unit to the mode
switch unit is omitted to enhance the readability of the figure.
[0138] In an alternative example a value of the switch variable S is set to 'small', which
could be implemented by letting the left and right steering parameters only differ
by a small amount according to some distance measure. The allowable amount is not
made dependent on the binaural utility values µ.
[0139] A sixth embodiment of the present invention comprises all features of the first to
fifth embodiments of the present invention and further comprises asymmetric synchronization
of an arbitrary meta-parameter vector. A meta-parameter is any parameter that influences
the hearing aid parameters that are used to process the sound. E.g. an 'aggressiveness
of learning' parameter will control how the learning of steering parameters is performed
in the left and the right hearing aid. This is an example of a meta-parameter which
is not part of the former categories. It may be tracked, based on running estimates
of how consistent a user is in operating a control wheel. E.g. it could prove beneficial
to use knowledge of the tracked aggressiveness in the left aid in tracking the aggressiveness
in the right hearing aid.
[0140] The sixth embodiment encompasses any or all features from the first to the fifth
embodiments involving steering parameters. However, any meta-parameter that determines
the function of any hearing aid processing module should be captured. This could be
a switch variable that determines the amount of symmetry in the left and right sounds
fields that are being used in the left and right hearing aid to adapt the processing.
Further, the non-steering situation should be included as well, i.e. a fixed but modifiable,
via personalization, meta-parameter that does not change with environment should fall
under this embodiment as well.
[0141] In Fig. 13 is shown a plot of a person's hearing loss in the right (R) and left (L)
ear respectively, as a function of frequency. In the plots the hearing threshold T(R)
and T(L) for a given frequency f_0 is shown. For the given frequency f_0 the perceived
loudness for the right and left ear is shown as a function of input sound pressure
level (SPL) in the two plots in Fig. 14.
[0142] Looking at the plots in Fig. 13 and 14 it is clear that in order to achieve the same
perceived loudness of sound at the frequency f_0 a higher input SPL is needed in the
left ear as compared to the right ear. In order for the person to perceive the same
loudness in the left and right ear it is necessary to incorporate the model of the
hearing loss of the individual in the model 24.
[0143] The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of hearing aid parameters,

and

that may be synchronized using the method for asymmetric synchronization according
to the present invention. The list of suitable parameters include: left and right
classifier outputs, volumes, noise reduction parameters, beam forming parameters,
feedback suppression parameters and the like. Of cause several of these parameters
may be synchronized simultaneously.
[0144] The above features of the embodiments of the method according to the present invention
may be combined in any way desirable.
[0145] In one embodiment, one may think of a synchronized feedback suppression. Here we
imagine a left and right hearing aid that each includes feedback suppression parameters
that determine the feedback suppression to be applied. E.g. in the form of a switch
variable in the case of strong periodicity, such as the presence of a pure tone, that
is present in both sound fields, and zero if this is not the case. Two periodicity
feature extraction procedures
FEL and
FER could be applied to both left and right hearing aids (see figure 2), and a combination
unit
FELR could output a switch variable to both hearing aids, that is one for binaural periodicity
and zero otherwise. Each of the hearing aids could then use this estimate of the amount
of binaural periodicity to determine whether a periodic sound inside one of the hearing
aid is due to internal feedback or due to an external tonal input.
[0146] In another embodiment, a hearing aid system could be supplied with a method to detect
a telephone near a hearing aid. This detection could e.g. be done by modelling and
detecting the typical feedback path that is caused by holding a phone near the ear,
or by letting the user manually specify the 'phone situation' via some interface to
the hearing aid. When the phone detection variable for the left hearing aid is 1,
which could be viewed as an output of a feature extraction unit
FEL, whereas the phone detection variable is zero for the right hearing aid, the synchronization
mode in the hearing aid system could be temporarily switched to a special 'phone-in-one-ear
mode'.
[0147] Conceptually, it would mean that the hearing aid system would switch to an asymmetric
mode, where the setting for the steering parameters

drives a high-amplification, high-feedback reduction and high-directional mode and
the

setting is driving a low-amplification, omni-directional mode. When the phone-in-one-ear
mode has ended, the hearing aid system could then go back to the 'default asymmetry'
mode.
[0148] In a third embodiment , one can think of a synchronized system of learning controls,
where the learning control in each of the ears is synchronized at the level of the
steering parameters. For example, a user may want a left hearing aid Learning Volume
Control setting, that is determined by personalized steering coefficients

that is the same as the setting

for the right LVC. This is implemented by the second embodiment when the output vector

of the hearing aid system contains left and right volumes, respectively. Hence, the
user only experiences gain differences when the sounds fields are different in left
and right hearing aids. The resulting sound processing may be more reflecting the
user's preferred processing. Furthermore, operating one of the volume wheels of the
hearing aid system will lead to learning in both steering parameters of the system,
hence lead to adjustments of the volume in the (non-operated) hearing aid as well.
[0149] In yet another embodiment one may consider an initial asymmetric fit of directionality
parameters in both hearing aids as an initial extreme case of binaural soft-switching
directionality. Here, one of the hearing aids (e.g. the left) is allowed to switch
and the other, the right in this example, is not allowed to switch, but it will stay
in omnidirectional mode all the time. This is conceptually equivalent to setting some
left directionality switching threshold, a steering parameter

to some reasonable value and setting the threshold of the other hearing aid

to infinity. The user may then adjust this initial, fully asymmetric, setting of
the hearing aid system by manipulating, and thereby personalizing, the left and right
steering parameters, that represent thresholds,. Hence, a user can customize the asymmetry
in the directionality switching behaviour and make it depend on the acoustic environment.
Furthermore, the initial choice of 'good ear', getting directional input, i.e. have
a low switching threshold, and 'bad ear', getting omnidirectional input, i.e. infinite
switching threshold, may be modified by the user, e.g. in the particular situation
that a source of interest is coming from only from the side of the bad ear.