MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509693455

Noise level and its perception by commuters in urban buses of Curitiba

2004· article· en· W1509693455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adriana Bender Moreira de Lacerda, Ângela Ribas, Jair Mendes, José Paulo Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCuritibaNoise (video)AnnoyancePerceptionTransport engineeringSound pressureNoise pollutionBus rapid transitIrritabilityTraffic noiseEngineeringAudiologyTelecommunicationsAcousticsComputer sciencePsychologyMedicinePublic transportNoise reductionCognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to evaluate the sound pressure level in commuter buses, as well as investigate the resulting hearing perception of commuters about the bus noise levels. This was accomplished by measuring the noise levels inside city buses as well as through a questionnaire completed by 808 commuters. This questionnaire requested information about vehicle characterization, noise perception inside the buses (noise presence, intensity, causes and effects), bus stations, and bus stops in different areas of Curitiba. The maximum noise level inside the vehicles was 81 dB (A), which is a high value since the World Health Organization (WHO) considers that a sound above 70 dB (A) may be harmful to human beings. The survey showed that although the noise was not considered as one of the main factors which cause discomfort in buses, commuters were able to identify the noise sources inside the buses. Commuters aslo complained about the noxious effects of the noise, such as irritability and headaches.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207