MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983125555 · doi:10.1121/1.5137100

Evaluating project-related noise impacts on sleep in environmental assessments: A proposal to apply decibel adjustments to nighttime noise events based on their time of occurrence over the sleep period time

2019· article· en· W2983125555 on OpenAlexaffabout
David S. Michaud, Stephen E. Keith, Allison Denning

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecibelAnnoyanceBedroomNoise (video)Environmental scienceSleep (system call)StatisticsNoise pollutionAudiologyMeteorologyComputer scienceMathematicsNoise reductionMedicineGeographyLoudness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health Canada is updating its Guidance for evaluating noise in environmental assessments. Current advice on sleep is drawn from the World Health Organization (WHO) which advises that average noise within the bedroom not exceed 30 dBA, and noise events not exceed 45 dB LAmax on more than 10–15 occasions. Both limits increase by 15 dB outdoors assuming partially opened windows. The WHO’s recommended outdoor nighttime annual average of 40 dBA is also used. Two situations commonly arise: (1) the outdoor annual average sound level is exceeded at baseline; or (2) the number of events during sleep exceeds 15, but are just below threshold. Under these situations, the estimated prevalence of high noise annoyance is applied to protect sleep because it includes a 10 dB nighttime penalty. However, this may not account for the variation in the acoustic threshold that has been observed throughout the sleep period. This paper presents two proposals: (1) apply a decibel adjustment to noise events occurring during periods where thresholds are known to be lower (i.e., the first hour and final 3 h) and/or (2) derive a rating level for estimating annoyance using an alternative nighttime adjustment that splits the night into distinct time periods.

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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