Differences in performance with different background sound and ambient noise in three open office plans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of noise on the performance of workers is investigated in three types of open workplaces: a combination of open plan and closed offices, rectangular configuration in open plan, and triangular configuration in open plan. An open workplace is intended to increase workers’ performance by creating a knowledge-sharing environment informally and seamlessly, while it is also known to decrease workers’ performance for they are annoyed with or distracted by the sound from the workplace. According to interviews from and questionnaires completed by workers in these workplaces, the order of preference was the combination, the rectangular configuration, and the triangular configuration workplaces. Each subject took two proofreading tests for 10 min under two different sound conditions. One of these conditions was background sound only with quiet HVAC sound and the other was ambient sound, which was recorded from each workplace along with speech and the sound from other activities by a binaural artificial head measurement system. The result is the mean test score of subjects from the triangular configuration workplace is significantly different from the mean test scores of subjects from the combination type workplace and the rectangular configuration workplace, respectively. [Work supported by IBM-Toronto, Inc.]
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".