References
- ANSI S3.46-1997. 1997. Methods of measurement of real-ear performance characteristics of hearing instruments. American National Standards Institute, New York.
- ANSI S3.35-2004. 2004. Method of measurement of performance characteristics of hearing instruments under simulated real-ear working conditions. American National Standards Institute, Melville.
- Banerjee S., Recker K. & Paumen A. 2006. A tale of two feedback cancellers. Hear Rev, 13 (7), 40–41, 44.
- Bisgaard N. Digital feedback suppression: Clinical experiences with profoundly hearing impaired. 15th Danavox Symposium. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology, J. Beilin, G.R. Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1993; 371–384
- Burkhard M., Sachs R. Anthropomorphic manikin for acoustic research. J Acoust Soc Am 1975; 58: 214–222
- Cox R.M. Combined effects of earmold vents and suboscillatory feedback on hearing instrument { XE “hearing instrument” } frequency response. Ear Hear 1982; 3: 12–17
- Dillon H. Hearing Aids. Thieme, New York 2001
- Engebretson A.M., French-St. George M. Properties of an adaptive feedback equalization algorithm. J Rehabil Res Dev 1993; 30: 8–16
- Flack L., White R., Tweed J., Gregory D.W., Qureshi M.Y. An investigation into attenuation by earmold { XE “earmold” } tubing. Br J Audiol 1995; 29: 237–245
- Freed D.J., Soli S.D. An objective procedure for evaluation of adaptive antifeedback algorithms in hearing aids. Ear Hear 2006; 27: 382–398
- French-St. George M., Wood D.J., Engebretson A.M. Behavioral assessment of adaptive feedback equalization in a digital hearing aid. J Rehabil Res Dev 1993; 30: 17–25
- Greenberg J.E., Zurek P.M., Brantley M. Evaluation of feedback-reduction algorithms for hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 108: 2366–2376
- Hellgren J., Lunner T., Arlinger S. System identification of feedback in hearing instruments. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 105: 3481–3496
- Henningsen L.B., Dyrlund O., Bisgaard N., Brink B. Digital feedback suppression (DFS). Clinical experiences when fitting a DFS hearing instrument on children. Scand Audiol 1994; 23: 117–122
- Kates J.M. Constrained adaptation for feedback cancellation in hearing instruments. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 106: 1010–1019
- Kates J.M. Adaptive feedback cancellation in hearing instruments. Adaptive Signal Processing: Application to Real-World Problems, J. Benesty, Y. Huang. Springer, NewYork 2003; 23–58
- Kiessling J., Margolf-Hackl S., Geller S., Olsen S.Ø. Researchers report on a field test of a non-occluding hearing instrument { XE “hearing instrument” }. Hear J 2003; 56(9)36–41
- Lantz J., Dyrlund O., Haastrup A., Olsen S.Ø. Real-ear measurement verification for open, non-occluding hearing instruments. Int J Audiol 2007; 46: 11–16
- Latzel M., Gebhart T.M., Kiessling J. Benefit of a digital feedback suppression system for acoustical telephone communication. Scand Audiol Suppl 2001; 52: 69–72
- Larsby B., Arlinger S. Comparison of different types of equipment for insertion gain measurement. 13th Danavox symposium. Hearing Instrument Fitting. Theoretical and Practical Views, J.H. Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1988; 39–48
- Merks I., Banerjee S., Trine T. Assessing the effectiveness of feedback cancellers in hearing aids. Hear Rev 2006; 13(4)53–57
- Oliveira R.J. The active ear canal. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 8: 401–410
- Olson L., Müsch H., Struck C. Digital solutions for feedback control. Hear Rev 2001; 8(5)44–49