Auditory Hazard Assessment Algorithm for Humans: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:41, 6 January 2020

Revision as of 17:42, 6 January 2020

Line 4:

{{COI|date=September 2018}}

}}

Combatants in every branch of the [[United States Armed Forces|United States military]] are at risk for [[Hearing loss|auditory impairments]] from [[Steadysteady state noise|steady state]] or [[Impulse noise (audio)|impulse noises]]. While applying double hearing protection helps prevent auditory damage, the user is isolated from the environment and the ability to detect, identify and localize important environmental cues is impaired. With hearing protection on, a soldier is less likely to be aware of their movements, alerting the enemy to their presence. Hearing protection devices ([[Hearing protection device|HPD]]) could also require higher volume levels for communication, negating their purpose.<ref name="Amrein">{{cite web |last1=Amrein |first1=Bruce |title=NOISE LIMITS FOR WARFIGHTING Recently Revised Standard Addresses Noise from Military Operations |url=http://synergist.aiha.org/201611-noise-limits-for-warfighting |website=thesynergist |accessdate=3 July 2018}}</ref>

The [[United States Army Research Laboratory|US Army Research Laboratory]]’s developed the '''Auditory Hazard Assessment Algorithm for Humans''' (AHAAH) to evaluate the potential damage to a user when exposed to high level [[Impulse noise (audio)|impulse noise]]. The model purports to be more than 94% accurate with regards to identifying safe and hazardous exposures based upon the Blast Overpressure Walk-up study conducted by the US Army.<ref name=Chan>{{cite journal |last1=Chan |first1=P.C. |last2=Ho |first2=K.H. |last3=Kan |first3=K.K. |last4=Stuhmiller |first4=J.H. |title=Evaluation of impulse noise criteria using human volunteer data |journal= J. Acoust. Soc. Am. |date=2001 |volume=110 |pages=1967–1975 |doi=10.1121/1.1391243}}</ref><ref name=Price>{{cite journal |last1=Price|first1=G.R. |title=Validation of the auditory hazard assessment algorithm for the human with impulse noise data |journal= J. Acoust. Soc. Am. |date=2007 |volume=122 |pages=2786–2802 |doi=10.1121/1.2785810}}</ref><ref name=DePaolis> {{cite journal |last1=DePaolis |first1=Annalisa |last2=Bikson |first2=Marome |last3=Nelson |first3=Jeremy |last4=de Ru |first4=J Alexander |last5=Packer |first5=Mark |last6=Cardoso |first6=Luis |title=Analytical and numerical modeling of the hearing system: Advances towards the assessment of hearing damage |journal= Hearing Research|date=Feb 2, 2017 |volume=349 |pages=111–118 |doi=10.1016/j.heares.2017.01.015 |pmid=28161584 |url=https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/28161584 |accessdate=3 July 2018}}</ref> In almost every instance any error resulted in over calculation of risk. By comparison the MIL-STD-147D was deemed correct in only 38% of cases with the same data.<ref name=DePaolis /> The user inputs their noise exposure, protection level, and whether they were forewarned of the noise, to receive their hazard vulnerability in auditory risk units (ARU). This value can be converted to compound threshold shifts and the allowed number of exposure (ANE). Compound threshold shifts is a value that integrates both temporary and permanent shifts in [[Absolute threshold of hearing|auditory threshold]], the latter being correlated to [[hair cell]] function.<ref name="DePaolis" />