MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493193531

Intake noise cancellation using a manifold bridging technique

2004· article· en· W1493193531 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Colin Novak, Helen Ule, Robert Gaspar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Noise and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoudnessSound qualityAcousticsNoise (video)PsychoacousticsInlet manifoldDynamometerNoise reductionEngineeringOctave (electronics)Active noise controlBridging (networking)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automobile manufacturers have expended considerable efforts to attenuate the many noise sources perceived within the passenger compartment with varying degrees of success. Given that these dominant noise sources have been attenuated, induction noise has become more noticeable. The present study investigates the feasibility of using a non-conventional noise cancellation technique. The investigation has attempted to improve the acoustic performance of the induction system by introducing a bridge between the exhaust and intake manifolds. The effectiveness of such a technique is investigated using Ricardo WAVE, a computational engine simulation technique that uses a one-dimensional finite-difference formulation. Graphical results using 1/12 th octave frequency spectra and three dimensional colour maps of both an unmodified and abridged engine are presented for both steady state and transient engine cases. A sound quality analysis is also presented using the psychoacoustic metrics of Loudness, Fluctuation Strength and Articulation Index. While a reduction in overall sound level was achieved, an additional benefit of this technique proved to be in the realized sound quality of the induction noise with the implementation of the manifold bridge. This investigation continues with verification of the theoretical model to experimental measurements on a dynamometer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicVehicle Noise and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207