Evaluating standard airborne sound insulation measures in terms of annoyance, loudness, and audibility ratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the results of an evaluation of the merits of standard airborne sound insulation measures with respect to subjective ratings of the annoyance and loudness of transmitted sounds. Subjects listened to speech and music sounds modified to represent transmission through 20 different walls with sound transmission class (STC) ratings from 34 to 58. A number of variations in the standard measures were also considered. These included variations in the 8-dB rule for the maximum allowed deficiency in the STC measure as well as variations in the standard 32-dB total allowed deficiency. Several spectrum adaptation terms were considered in combination with weighted sound reduction index (R(w)) values as well as modifications to the range of included frequencies in the standard rating contour. A STC measure without an 8-dB rule and an R(w) rating with a new spectrum adaptation term were better predictors of annoyance and loudness ratings of speech sounds. R(w) ratings with one of two modified C(tr) spectrum adaptation terms were better predictors of annoyance and loudness ratings of transmitted music sounds. Although some measures were much better predictors of responses to one type of sound than were the standard STC and R(w) values, no measure was remarkably improved for predicting annoyance and loudness ratings of both music and speech sounds.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".