MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W311339891

Effect of the New Insulation Liner on Noise Levels in the CH124B (Sea King) Aircraft

2008· article· en· W311339891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bernadette Quémerais

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewNoise (video)Octave bandOctave (electronics)AirframeAircraft noiseAeronauticsSound pressureMarine engineeringAcousticsShearwaterEngineeringEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyNoise reductionTelecommunicationsAerospace engineeringGeologyGeographyComputer sciencePhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : Crew members of the CH124B (Sea King) helicopter are exposed to elevated noise levels. To minimize noise levels as well as to insulate electrical wiring, the Sea King is equipped with a liner, which reduces noise. Recently the Sea King helicopters have been equipped with a new type of liner. Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) Toronto was asked to verify the noise levels in the Sea King during flight with the new liner and compare it with the old liner. Equivalent noise levels and octave band analysis were performed on a Sea King helicopter from Shearwater in February 5 and 6, 2008. Results showed that the new liner has absorption capabilities similar to or better than the old liner, except at the very low frequency of 8 Hz where absorption capability was lower for the new liner. Although at-ear sound pressure levels were not measured, it is reasonable to assume that they are acceptable with the new liner since they were acceptable with the old liner. Since sound pressure levels are significantly higher when the cargo door is open, it was recommended to open the door only for a short period of time to avoid excessive exposure for the crewmen and troops.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207