MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104784265 · doi:10.1121/1.2769988

Prediction of noise levels and annoyance from aircraft run-ups at Vancouver International Airport

2007· article· en· W2104784265 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katrina Scherebnyj, Murray Hodgson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsAnnoyanceAircraft noiseNoise (video)Environmental scienceJet (fluid)MeteorologyWind speedSensitivity (control systems)AcousticsAtmosphere (unit)Computer scienceAerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineeringNoise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annoyance complaints resulting from engine run-ups have been increasing at Vancouver International Airport for several years. To assist the Airport in managing run-up noise levels, a prediction tool based on a Green's function parabolic equation (GFPE) model has been consolidated, evaluated, and applied. It was extended to include more realistic atmospheric and ground input parameters. Measurements were made of the noise-radiation characteristics of a CRJ200 jet aircraft. The GFPE model was validated by comparing predictions with results in the literature. A sensitivity analysis showed that predicted levels are relatively insensitive to small variations in geometry and ground impedance, but relatively sensitive to variations in wind speed, atmosphere type, and aircraft heading and power setting. Predicted noise levels were compared with levels measured at noise monitoring terminals. For the four cases for which all input information was available, agreement was within 10 dBA. For events for which some information had to be estimated, predictions were within 20 dBA. The predicted annoyance corresponding to the run-up events considered ranged from 1.8% to 9.5% of people awoken, suggesting that noise complaints can be expected.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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