The relationship between the in situ flanking sound reduction index and the laboratory measured flanking normalized level difference
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From Gerretsen’s 1979 Applied Acoustics paper through four series of standards including ISO 12354 and ISO 10848, a significant amount of effort has gone into creating a standardized prediction method that uses standardized laboratory measured values to predict the apparent sound reduction index to demonstrate compliance with regulations. The terms and equations in the prediction method have evolved over time as researchers have evaluated the results of the prediction method, especially in the case of lightweight constructions for which statistical energy analysis is not well suited. To reflect the changes to other equations in the prediction method over the past 40 years, this paper suggests an update to the relationship in ISO 12354-1 between the in situ flanking sound reduction index and the laboratory measured flanking normalized level difference. The suggested changes are of importance for Type B elements such as timber and steel framed walls and floors for which the prediction of flanking transmission according to ISO 12354 requires the measurement of the level difference in laboratory flanking facilities.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it