MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994703908

Hearing Protection Performance Evaluation of Active Noise Reduction Headsets Under High Intensity Noise Levels

2019· article· en· W2994703908 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Victor Krupka, Sebastian Ghinet, Viresh Wickramasinghe, Anant Grewal

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadsetNoise (video)Sound pressureCrewHearing lossNoise reductionQUIETComputer scienceAcousticsAmbient noise levelIntensity (physics)Sound intensityAudiologyTelecommunicationsEngineeringMedicinePhysicsAeronauticsSound (geography)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High levels of noise within airborne or ground vehicles affect crew communication and prolonged exposure may lead to hearing-related damage if insufficient hearing protection is implemented. These acoustic environments are unique and varied based upon sources that generate tonal noise, broadband noise and impulsive noise. One of the recommended solutions to mitigate the auditory risks of working in high noise intensity levels was to utilise hearing protectors with Active Noise Reduction (ANR) systems. Investigation was required in order to establish if performance degradation should be expected, the goal being to determine if further more comprehensive performance assessments would be required for hearing protectors with ANR. In the present study, the four David Clark headset models e.g. 40600G-15, 40600G-20, 40750G-01 and H10-76XL were tested at various sound pressure levels such as 111 dB, 115 dB, 120 dB, 125 dB and 131 dB. As a result of this evaluation, it was observed that the performance of the four headset systems with ANR ON was repeatable and constant for noise excitation levels below 120dB. However, as is demonstrated by the preliminary evaluation, the insertion loss performance of the four headsets with ANR systems ON, when exposed to unweighted overall sound pressure levels (OSPL) superior to 120dB, significantly degraded with each increasing noise level increment. It is also very important to mention that the passive hearing protection performance of the four headsets (ANR OFF) remained, as expected, consistent (no degradation observed) at all high intensity noise levels considered in this study. It will be shown that the performance of the hearing protectors with ANR electronic systems has to be consistently evaluated at various noise levels in order to accurately assess their expected performance in real life mission environment for personnel exposure to high intensity noise levels above 120dB.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207