MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517908811

CSA Z107.56 and Safe Use of Music Players

2016· article· en· W2517908811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tim Kelsall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningNoise (video)Noise controlNoise exposureAmbient noise levelComputer scienceNoise reductionHearing lossPsychologyAcousticsAudiologySound (geography)CommunicationMedicineArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il y a eu beaucoup d'inquiétude au sujet des jeunes (et plus) personnes écoutant les lecteurs de musique personnels dans le cadre de leur vie quotidienne et la façon de les protéger contre la perte d'audition.CSA Z107.56 comprend une section sur l'estimation de l'exposition au bruit dans les casques qui met cette question en perspective.Basé sur des recherches indiquant que la plupart des gens régler le volume de la musique et de la parole à environ 15 dB au-dessus de la température ambiante actuelle la norme fournit une estimation de leur exposition au bruit.En supposant, comme la norme fait, que les écouteurs typiques offrent peu de réduction du bruit ambiant, la plupart des gens ne seront pas exposées au-dessus de 85 dBA à condition que le bruit de fond est inférieur à 70 dBA.Dans la pratique, cela signifie que la surexposition devrait être rare sauf dans les rues très fréquentées ou dans des véhicules plus forts, tels que les voitures de sport, le transport à grande vitesse et des avions.Cela limite les domaines de préoccupation considérablement et devrait aider à cibler les moyens utiles pour contrôler la surexposition.Mots-clés: Musique, exposition au bruit, les normes de bruit des casques de CSA, le bruit des transports, le bruit de la circulation

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207