[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sound shadowing is much more effective at high frequencies, so the
pinnae and head can evolve to take advantage of the interaural
intensity difference cue. However, at low frequencies, sound shadowing
is much less marked and animals are forced to use something else.
Animals that use low frequency sounds a lot tend to be bigger, so
there are usually significant onset time and phase difference cues
that can be exploited. Onset time doesn't provide much information,
particularly for continuous sounds, but phase difference is vulnerable
to multipath signals and echoes. You pays your money and takes your
choice. The MiCRAM robot our lab is developing uses all of the above,
and we are investigating other approaches, including triangulation,
target motion analysis, and more complex cues.
On 23 Sep 2009, at 04:23, David Schwartz wrote:
I'm struggling to understand why the interaural time difference is
an effective localization cue for low frequency sound but not for
high frequency sound. Can anyone help to clear up my confusion?
Harry Erwin, PhD, Senior Lecturer of Computing, University of
Sunderland. Computational neuroethologist: