Measurement of hearing-protector attenuation using auditory steady state responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a need to assess hearing protection device (HPD) attenuation to ensure that individuals receive adequate protection from noise. Present methods of attenuation measurement have limitations. Objective measurements such as field microphone in real ear (F-MIRE) do not assess bone conducted sound. Psychophysical measurements such as real ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) are biased due to the low frequency masking effects from test subjects' physiological noise, and the variability of measurements based on subjective response. We explored using auditory steady state responses (ASSR) as a technique that may overcome these limitations. ASSRs were recorded in ten normal hearing adults, using both “normal” and “occluded” conditions. Stimuli included both narrow band noises and pure tones (500 and 1000 Hz), amplitude modulated at 40 Hz. Stimuli were presented through either loudspeakers or headphones, at 45, 55, and 65 dB SPL. “Physiological attenuation” was calculated as the difference between ASSR values (both amplitude and phase) for normal and occluded conditions. Physiological attenuation estimates were compared to in-ear (objective) and psychophysical (subjective) measurements. Grand mean ASSR data complied well with in-ear and subjective measurements. Further work is needed to provide accurate assessment of ASSR-based physiological attenuation for individual subjects.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".