Effect of noise and occupancy on optimal reverberation times for speech intelligibility in classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The question of what is the optimal reverberation time for speech intelligibility in an occupied classroom has been studied recently in two different ways, with contradictory results. Experiments have been performed under various conditions of speech-signal to background-noise level difference and reverberation time, finding an optimal reverberation time of zero. Theoretical predictions of appropriate speech-intelligibility metrics, based on diffuse-field theory, found nonzero optimal reverberation times. These two contradictory results are explained by the different ways in which the two methods account for background noise, both of which are unrealistic. To obtain more realistic and accurate predictions, noise sources inside the classroom are considered. A more realistic treatment of noise is incorporated into diffuse-field theory by considering both speech and noise sources and the effects of reverberation on their steady-state levels. The model shows that the optimal reverberation time is zero when the speech source is closer to the listener than the noise source, and nonzero when the noise source is closer than the speech source. Diffuse-field theory is used to determine optimal reverberation times in unoccupied classrooms given optimal values for the occupied classroom. Resulting times can be as high as several seconds in large classrooms; in some cases, optimal values are unachievable, because the occupants contribute too much absorption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".