MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346620756 · doi:10.1121/1.4950354

An evaluation of how nightly variations in wind turbine noise levels influence wrist actigraphy measured sleep patterns

2016· article· en· W2346620756 on OpenAlexaffabout
David S. Michaud

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActigraphyTurbineNoise (video)Sleep (system call)Wind speedAudiologyEnvironmental scienceWind powerQUIETStatisticsAcousticsPsychologyMeteorologyMedicineMathematicsComputer scienceEngineeringGeographyElectrical engineeringPhysicsCircadian rhythm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health Canada’s Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study assessed self-reported and objective measures of sleep on a sub-sample of the study’s 1238 participants. The data analysis indicated that calculated long term outdoor wind turbine noise (WTN) levels up to 46 dBA did not have a significant influence on the evaluated measures of sleep (Michaud et al., 2016, Sleep 39, 97–109). A more refined analysis is being conducted to assess wrist actigraphy measured sleep patterns in relation to nightly variations in wind turbine operations. Variations in turbine operations (i.e., RPM and electrical power) were used to calculate WTN levels in 10-min intervals and time-synchronised with sleep watch data collected in 1-min epochs. The 10-min sound levels and daily sleep diaries (relied upon to adjust for closed or open windows) were used to estimate indoor A-weighted WTN levels. The correction factor used to obtain indoor sound levels was derived from a series of field measurements designed to investigate the outdoor to indoor sound pressure level difference on a representative sample of dwellings. The analysis is restricted to participants living between 0.25 and 1 km from wind turbines (116 males and 159 females). At these distances, WTN levels are the highest making it more likely to detect potential WTN impacts on sleep. Results will be presented for multiple measures of sleep in 10-min intervals and nightly averages for up to seven consecutive sleep nights.

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)0.004
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 score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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