MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986741372 · doi:10.1121/1.3655265

A semi-analytical ray method to predict the propagation of long-range vertical noise: Application of NORD 2000 to the prediction of aircraft en-route noise

2011· article· en· W1986741372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kieran Poulain, Victor W. Sparrow

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise (video)Aircraft noiseQUIETContext (archaeology)Range (aeronautics)MeteorologySound propagationComputer scienceComputationAltitude (triangle)Ambient noise levelEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringAcousticsRemote sensingGeologyPhysicsNoise reductionEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithmSound (geography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past, considerable efforts were made into developing models for the prediction of short-range propagation, in the context of airport noise (Integrated Noise Model, FAA) or more generally for short-range horizontal community noise propagation (NORD 2000, Delta Inc.). Recent research efforts have focused on the prediction of aircraft en-route noise for flights above 18 000 feet above ground level (AGL) (5.49 km AGL), in order to estimate the noise impact in U.S. National Parks and other quiet areas. Unlike other community noise issues, long-range vertical propagation requires an altitude-stratified and realistic atmosphere, which directly impacts the geometrical and absorption losses as well as the ground effects. Given the large distances involved, the use of a semi-analytical propagation model based on the ray theory could prove to be useful in reducing the computation time. NORD 2000, based on semi-analytical ray theory, was modified for use with aircraft en-route noise. A comparative study against AERNOM (Advanced En Route NOise Module, based on the numerical ray method) from Penn State is presented. [Work supported by VOLPE National Transportation Systems Center. The findings are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of VOLPE, the FAA, NASA, or Transport Canada.]

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207