Ongoing confirmation of an objective criterion predicting annoyance linked to wind turbines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2023 CAA Acoustics Week in Canada introduced a criterion based on an objective acoustic measure to predict annoyance subjectively identified by residents living in the vicinity of wind turbines. That evidence was gathered primarily at a site near constant speed, stall regulated wind turbines. This paper presents subsequent investigations confirming that the criterion is also effective at a site with variable speed pitch regulated wind turbines. The results arise from the analysis of over 400 days of sampling at a site 787 m from the nearest wind turbine, with 18 turbines within 3 km. Verification of the study data was shown by comparison to data collected by an acoustic contractor employed by the provincial Ministry of the Environment. That data was collected through over 70 recording periods to analyze times residents at the site identified annoyance during a Ministry audit. These samples were obtained through a Freedom of Information request purchase. Analysis of the samples confirms the annoyance criterion identified at the CAA 2023 conference applies also for a different turbine type to objectively predict the annoyance subjectively identified by residents. The implications of this confirmation will be 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".