Calibration of smartphone-based devices for noise exposure monitoring: methodology, uncertainties of measurement and implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Standardized noise exposure campaigns face challenges such as high cost of instrumentation and other difficulties associated with practical deployment in the field. Our ongoing research evaluates the suitability of an alternate solution based on smartphone sensing: the occupational noise exposure and its associated measurement uncertainties are estimated from a spatio-temporal analysis of smartphones' noise measurements and GPS data. This paper presents a laboratory free field calibration method for any noise dosimeter application on smartphone-based device. The proposed calibration procedure includes a frequency response linearization and an A-weighted sound level correction which is a function of the C-weighted minus A-weighted (C-A) noise levels values and A-weighted noise level. To ensure a realistic calibration, noise sources used during the measurement are based on the distribution of a referenced industrial noise database. The methodology of the measurements and the calculation of combined uncertainties associated with the measured correction values are detailed. The interpolation of calibration values and their implementation in an Android app, developed by the authors, is also 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".