The spatial uniformity of an electronic sound masking system in an open-plan space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An electronic sound-masking system reduces workers' distractions in open-plan spaces by utilizing an artificial broadband sound. The artificial sound should raise a background noise level spectrum to the targeted masking sound level uniformly over the entire area.Uneven distribution of the masking sound levels can cause unnecessary loud background noise or inefficient sound masking performance at the same time and in different locations. The ASTM E 1573-18 standard provides a procedure to quantify the uniformity of the masking sound but does not specify any acceptable degree of uniformity. Thus, this study aims to investigate the uniformity of the masking sound field in an open-plan space under varying room acoustic conditions. The acoustic measurement was carried out in an open-plan office with a measurement grid of 0.6 m. The spatial variation of the sound pressure levels was calculated with the measured one-third-octave band SPLs from 250 Hz to 4 kHz. The study also employed computer-aided acoustic simulation to find key design parameters, impacting the uniformity of the masking sound. The results show that the number of loudspeakers, a partition height, scattering, and absorption coefficients can significantly influence the spatial uniformity and speech privacy within the space. Finally, the results proposed an acceptable variation of the masking sound field by examining the Articulation Index (AI) change in the space.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".