MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2258978893 · doi:10.7205/milmed.169.7.551

Sound Attenuation of the Indoor/Outdoor Range E-A-R Plug

2004· article· en· W2258978893 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon M. Abel, Quan Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttenuationAcoustic attenuationSound (geography)Spark plugAcousticsOctave bandNoise (video)AudiologyRange (aeronautics)Environmental scienceOctave (electronics)Computer scienceMedicineMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sound attenuation provided by the AOSafety Indoor/Outdoor Range E-A-R Plug was examined. This device, currently used in military operations in several countries, is comprised of two plugs that provide conventional ("indoor" plug) and level-dependent sound reduction (the "outdoor" plug), respectively. The effects of the user's gender and repeated fittings were explored. Eight men and eight women were tested on two separate occasions. Unoccluded and protected hearing thresholds were measured for each of nine one-third octave noise bands centered at 0.125 to 8 kHz. Attenuation was calculated as the difference between these two measures. The indoor plug provided 21 to 40 dB of sound reduction across the frequencies tested, closely matching the manufacturer's specification. The outdoor plug provided 5 to 22 dB of conventional attenuation, suggesting that it might serve as a safe means of conventional and level-dependant attenuation in hearing-impaired users. No differences were found in relation to gender or repeated fittings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMilitary MedicineSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207