MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067369919 · doi:10.1121/1.1423927

Social survey of community response to a step change in aircraft noise exposure

2002· article· en· W2067369919 on OpenAlex
Sanford Fidell, Laura Silvati, Edward Haboly

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunwayAnnoyanceAircraft noiseNoise (video)Telephone surveyNoise exposureAeronauticsPsychologyAcousticsComputer scienceGeographyAudiologyEngineeringMedicineBusinessAdvertisingNoise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community response to a step change in aircraft noise exposure associated with the opening of a new runway at Vancouver International Airport was documented in two rounds of telephone interviews. One round of interviews was conducted 15 months prior to the start of operations on the new runway, while a second round of interviews was undertaken 21 months after the start of operations. The proportion of respondents who described themselves as "very" or "extremely" annoyed by aircraft noise in a residential area with increased aircraft noise exposure after the runway opening was markedly greater than that predictable from well-known dosage-response relationships. Analysis suggests that a good part of the "excess" annoyance is attributable to the net influence of nonacoustic factors.

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.

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)0.007
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.291 · 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