MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022077571 · doi:10.1121/1.4744809

Speech privacy in open-plan offices. I. Systematic measurements

2001· article· en· W2022077571 on OpenAlexaff
John S. Bradley, Chong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen planCeiling (cloud)WorkstationIntelligibility (philosophy)Computer sciencePlan (archaeology)AcousticsOperating systemEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work reports the results of a systematic series of measurements of speech propagation between workstations in a conventional open-plan office. The propagation measurements were repeated as the parameters describing the open-office configuration were systematically changed. The values of the following were varied: workstation panel height, panel absorption, workstation plan size, ceiling height, and ceiling absorption. In addition the effects of the location and type of ceiling light fixtures were investigated as well as details of the workstation furnishings and configuration. The results are evaluated in terms of Speech Intelligibility Index values, SII (ANSI S3.5 1997). The SII is a new version of the articulation index and is a weighted speech-to-noise ratio that is a good measure of the expected speech privacy. The height of the partial height panels separating workstations and the absorption of the ceiling have the most important effects on speech privacy. Workstation size, panel absorption, and lighting configuration have intermediate effects on speech privacy. Ceiling height and workstation configuration had smaller effects on expected speech privacy.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207