MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2030655372 · doi:10.1121/1.4899501

The impact of auralization on design decisions for the House of Commons of the Canadian Parliament

2014· article· en· W2030655372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald Eligator

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHouse of CommonsComputer scienceParliamentArchitectural engineeringIntelligibility (philosophy)AcousticsLawEngineeringPolitical sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The House of Commons of the Canadian Parliament will be temporary relocated to a 27,000 m3 glass-enclosed atrium with stone and glass walls while their home Chamber is being renovated and restored. Acoustic goals include excellent speech intelligibility for Members and guests in the room, and production of high-quality audio recordings of all proceedings for live and recorded streaming and broadcast. Room modeling and auralization using CATT Acoustic has been used to evaluate the acoustic environment of the temporary location during design. Modeling and testing of the current House Chamber has also been performed to validate the results and conclusions drawn from the model of the new space. The use of auralizations has helped the Owner and Architect understand the impact of design choices on the achievement of the acoustic performance goals, and smoothed the path for the integration of design features that might otherwise have been difficult for them to accept. Measured and calculated data as well as audio examples will be presented.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→