Thesis (M.S.)--Oregon State University, 2004. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2010. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 186-205). Also available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2006. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the World Wide Web.

No description available.

In this thesis, we discuss a new kind of polygon, which we call one-sided polygons. The shortest path between any pair of vertices of a one-sided polygon makes only left turns or right turns. We prove that the set of one-sided polygons is a superset of the star-shaped polygons and the spiral polygons. We also show that the set of one-sided polygons is a subset of the set of LR-visibility polygons. We present a linear time recognition algorithm for one-sided rectilinear polygons. We then discuss the searching of monotone and one-sided rectilinear polygons. We show that all one-sided polygons can be 1-searched and a search schedule can be given in linear time.

In this thesis, we discuss a new kind of polygon, which we call one-sided polygons. The shortest path between any pair of vertices of a one-sided polygon makes only left turns or right turns. We prove that the set of one-sided polygons is a superset of the star-shaped polygons and the spiral polygons. We also show that the set of one-sided polygons is a subset of the set of LR-visibility polygons. We present a linear time recognition algorithm for one-sided rectilinear polygons. We then discuss the searching of monotone and one-sided rectilinear polygons. We show that all one-sided polygons can be 1-searched and a search schedule can be given in linear time.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Montana, 2006 / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Mar. 18, 2007). Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

No description available.

Nine adults with single-sided deafness previously implanted with a Baha were given a two-week trial with a CROS hearing aid and tested in unaided and aided conditions. Both devices were compared on head shadow effect reduction, speech perception measures, self-assessment questionnaires, and daily diaries. The CROS reduced the head shadow effect for more frequencies than the Baha. Participants performed well across all conditions with speech to the poor ear in quiet. The QuickSIN showed both devices adversely affected speech perception with noise to the poor ear; the CROS was more disadvantageous. Neither device improved speech perception with noise to the better ear. The BBSS and SSQ demonstrated subjective benefit and the diaries indicated frequent use of both devices. Five participants preferred the CROS for sound quality; three preferred the Baha for comfort. As both devices seem comparable, a CROS should be the first intervention option recommended before considering Baha surgery.