MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129701079 · doi:10.1177/1351010x21993742

Case study: A survey of perceived noise in Canadian multi-unit residential buildings to study long-term implications for widespread teleworking

2021· article· en· W3129701079 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maedot S. Andargie, Marianne F. Touchie, William O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Acoustics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNoise (video)Work (physics)AnnoyanceScale (ratio)Unit (ring theory)BusinessEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeographyPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trends of urbanization, densification, and telework all point to increasing exposure to ambient noise for workers. With the lockdown policies implemented in response to COVID-19, a research opportunity to study perceived noise exposure for teleworking arose. This paper presents the results of a survey on noise issues in multi-unit residential buildings (MURBs) and the consequent effects on occupants' well-being and productivity during the lockdown. Responses were collected from 471 MURB occupants across Canada. The results show that, despite the decrease in environmental noise, many are annoyed by outdoor noise, particularly from traffic and construction activities, and indicated that it affects their ability to work. Effects on ability to work from home were more frequently reported for indoor noise sources particularly airborne and impact noises coming from neighboring suites. Our findings, however, show that noise coming from occupants in the same suite (i.e. roommates and family) present the biggest issue. The findings indicate that existing noise conditions in MURBs might not be suitable for a permanent large-scale implementation of teleworking.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 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

Citations54
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding AcousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207