MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021627486 · doi:10.1121/1.3641406

MP3 player listening sound pressure levels among 10 to 17 year old students

2011· article· en· W2021627486 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen E. Keith, David S. Michaud, Katya Feder, Ifaz T. Haider, Leonora Marro, Emma Thompson, André Marcoux

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeSound pressureNoise (video)AudiologySound exposureMedicineSound (geography)Sound level meterActive listeningMathematicsVolume (thermodynamics)StatisticsAcousticsNoise levelPsychologyPhysicsComputer scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a manikin, equivalent free-field sound pressure level measurements were made from the portable digital audio players of 219 subjects, aged 10 to 17 years (93 males) at their typical and "worst-case" volume levels. Measurements were made in different classrooms with background sound pressure levels between 40 and 52 dBA. After correction for the transfer function of the ear, the median equivalent free field sound pressure levels and interquartile ranges (IQR) at typical and worst-case volume settings were 68 dBA (IQR = 15) and 76 dBA (IQR = 19), respectively. Self-reported mean daily use ranged from 0.014 to 12 h. When typical sound pressure levels were considered in combination with the average daily duration of use, the median noise exposure level, Lex, was 56 dBA (IQR = 18) and 3.2% of subjects were estimated to exceed the most protective occupational noise exposure level limit in Canada, i.e., 85 dBA Lex. Under worst-case listening conditions, 77.6% of the sample was estimated to listen to their device at combinations of sound pressure levels and average daily durations for which there is no known risk of permanent noise-induced hearing loss, i.e., ≤ 75 dBA Lex. Sources and magnitudes of measurement uncertainties are also discussed.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207