Exploring nighttime road traffic noise: A comprehensive predictive surface for Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road traffic noise can adversely impact the health of city residents, particularly when it occurs at night. The objective of this study was to evaluate nighttime traffic ambient noise in Toronto, Canada using measured and model-estimated noise levels. Road traffic noise was measured at 767 locations over 3 seasonal sampling campaigns between June 2012 and October 2013 to fully capture noise variability in Toronto. Temporal and campaign-specific spatial models, developed using the noise measurements, were used to build a final predictive surface. The surface was capable of estimating noise across the city over a 24-hr time frame. Measured and surface-estimated noise levels were compared with guidelines from the World Health Organization and the Province of Ontario to identify areas where noise may pose a health risk. Measured mean nighttime noise in Toronto exceeded World Health Organization (40 dBA) guidelines and mean daytime noise exceeded provincial (55 dBA) guidelines. The final predictive surface, incorporating spatial variables and daily cycles in noise levels, provides noise estimates geocoded for the entire study area. This tool could be used for epidemiological studies and to inform noise mitigation efforts. Based on surface-estimated noise levels during the quietest time of night (2 a.m.-2:30 a.m.), 100% of Toronto has nighttime noise exceeding 40 dBA (mean = 57 dBA, range = 49-110 dBA). A predictive surface was developed to estimate geocoded noise levels and facilitate further study of noise in Toronto. This tool can be used to assess road traffic noise, particularly at night, as an environmental health hazard.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".