Bibliographic record
Abstract
The noise levels in the passenger cabin of turbopropeller-driven aircraft are typically higher than the noise levels in comparable turbofan-powered aircraft. The sources of noise in a turboprop aircraft include boundary layer flow noise, structure-borne noise due to engine vibration, and acoustic excitation of the fuselage due to the propeller, with the latter being dominant for most turboprop aircraft. Possible noise reduction approaches encompass passive methods, such as structural modification, damping treatment, and active methods, which range from synchrophasing of the propellers to control of either the acoustic field or the structural vibration transmission path. An active noise control approach discussed in this paper is designed to weaken the coupling between the exterior and interior acoustics of turboprop aircraft. In this approach, the transmission of sound is impaired before it enters the cabin, which is superior to treating the problem further down the transmission path. Piezoceramic elements were used for structural actuation and vibration and/or acoustic sensing was employed. Full-scale testing was performed to evaluate the performance of the active noise control system. Significant reductions in noise level of up to 28 dB were achieved. Moreover the reduction in noise was global, leading to lower noise throughout the cabin. The results of this investigation demonstrate that Active Structural Acoustic Control Systems are capable of providing significant noise reduction and vibration suppression of aircraft to improve the habitability of the cabin.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".