MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013714005 · doi:10.1121/1.3384276

Application of atmospheric absorption models for aircraft enroute noise.

2010· article· en· W2013714005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kieran Poulain, Victor W. Sparrow, Kenneth S. Brentner, Louis C. Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceAltitude (triangle)Noise (video)QUIETAtmospheric sciencesAircraft noiseAbsorption (acoustics)Atmosphere (unit)MeteorologyPhysicsAcousticsComputer scienceMathematicsNoise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Propagation of aircraft enroute noise for flights above 18 000 ft above ground level (AGL) (5.49 km AGL) is important for estimating noise impact in U.S. National Parks and other quiet areas. One key to the accurate estimation of noise impact is atmospheric absorption. In our atmosphere, it turns out that the absorption coefficient is dependent on altitude as well as frequency. The altitude dependent parameters include mean pressure, temperature, and relative humidity as well as the concentration of molecular species. This altitude effect can be important for certain frequency bands, and this point will be emphasized in this paper. In addition, an improved atmospheric absorption model for high altitudes of Sutherland and Bass [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115, 1012–1032 (2004)] shows slightly different values of atmospheric absorption in important frequency bands for aviation noise at altitude compared to the typical ANSI Standard S1.26-1995 (R 2009). For certain situations, the updated atmospheric absorption coefficient could produce different enroute noise predictions on the ground. [Work supported by FAA/NASA/Transport-Canada PARTNER Center of Excellence.]

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)0.003
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.312 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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