The public’s exposure to and perception of noise in aquatic facilities: a pilot study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to noise in recreational settings is a major public health concern. Under the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act, workers shall not be exposed to noise levels in excess of 85 dB over an 8-h period. It is generally accepted that the public’s exposure to noise be held to this same standard. The current pilot study explored whether the public is being exposed to excessive noise in indoor aquatic facilities across the Greater Toronto Area and, if so, at what levels. To our knowledge, no other study has explored this topic. Eight separate facilities were assessed using sound level meters to capture LA eq , LA peak , and LAS > 85 dB exceedance/duration. Public perception of noise was determined using self-administered questionnaires. LA eq ranged from 73.6 dB–82.3 dB and LA peak ranged from 102.2 dB–122 dB. Although the LA eq did not exceed the legislated standard, LA peak values were high. Noise levels were mainly associated with the type of activity in the pool and whistle blowing. Overall, the public were indifferent to the noise levels, despite the LA peak being quite high. Further studies are recommended to explore this topic, with a particular emphasis on comparison of different activities within the same facility.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 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 it