MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037490887 · doi:10.1121/1.3273892

Prediction of the acoustical performance of enclosures using a hybrid statistical energy analysis: Image source model

2010· article· en· W2037490887 on OpenAlexaff
Franck Sgard, Hugues Nélisse, Noureddine Atalla, Celse K. Amédin, Rémy Oddo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnclosureStatistical energy analysisAcousticsRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceSound energyRangingEnergy (signal processing)Noise (video)Transmission lossBioacousticsSound transmission classSound (geography)MathematicsStatisticsPhysicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enclosures are commonly used to reduce the sound exposure of workers to the noise radiated by machinery. Some acoustic predictive tools ranging from simple analytical tools to sophisticated numerical deterministic models are available to estimate the enclosure acoustical performance. However, simple analytical models are usually valid in limited frequency ranges because of underlying assumptions whereas numerical models are commonly limited to low frequencies. This paper presents a general and simple model for predicting the acoustic performance of large free-standing enclosures which is capable of taking into account the complexity of the enclosure configuration and covering a large frequency range. It is based on the statistical energy analysis (SEA) framework. The sound field inside the enclosure is calculated using the method of image sources. Sound transmission across the various elements of the enclosure is considered in the SEA formalism. The model is evaluated by comparison with existing methods and experimental results. The effect of several parameters such as enclosure geometry, panel materials, presence of noise control treatments, location of the source inside the enclosure, and presence of an opening has been investigated. The comparisons between the model and the experimental results show a good agreement for most of the tested configurations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations34
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207