MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045582837 · doi:10.1121/1.4805325

A case-study on the continuous use of an in-ear dosimetric device

2013· article· en· W2045582837 on OpenAlexaff
Kuba Mazur, Jérémie Voix

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimeterComputer scienceNoise (video)HeadphonesAndroid (operating system)AcousticsBeaconHearing protectionReal-time computingHearing lossDosimetryAudiologyArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to further understand the combined effects of occupational and recreational noise exposure with regards to noise induced hearing loss (NIHL), an in-ear dosimeter prototype meant for continuous use was developed. The device acts as a hearing protection device (HPD) and can measure and log effective in-ear sound pressure level as well as unprotected levels. To enable its continuous use, this HPD is also equipped with a bypass feature for “transparent” hearing, input for music or communication devices and interfaces with Android smartphones. The proposed device allows for the implementation of an algorithm accounting for the auditory fatigue recovery rate, providing a true representation of the current accumulated noise dose. This allows for 24 h dosimetry and avoids having the user manually reset the dose back to 0% on the next day and thus assuming complete fatigue recovery has occurred. This paper details the proposed recovery algorithm, presents collected field data, and discusses the benefits as well as real-world challenges of using such a device.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207