Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personal noise dosimeters are designed to monitor noisy environments and are usually intended to attached to an individual person in order to estimate their exposure to noise over a given period of time. These devices are often used to indicate sound exposure as a percentage of a predetermined criterion. However, different jurisdictions employ different definitions of such quantities and different criteria for permissible exposure. Therefore, existing normative standards for measurement instruments differ in their specifications. For example, while the ASA/ANSI S1.25 standard Specification for Personal Noise Dosimeters makes provisions for use of three level-time exchange rates (3, 4, and 5 dB per doubling of exposure time), the international standard for personal sound exposure meters (IEC 61252) permits only an exchange rate of 3 dB. The International Electrotechnical Commission is revising IEC 61252 to modernize and harmonize requirements for the instruments to reflect the actual practice of measurements of noise exposure worldwide. The technical aims of the revision are to provide realistic specifications, consistent methods for testing all relevant characteristics of a model of instrument, and affordable methods for periodic testing of individual instruments. Potential consequences of the likely changes to IEC 61252 are presented and discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.067 | 0.122 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".