MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400288452 · doi:10.1121/10.0027293

Identifying noise control strategies for variable air volume (VAV) boxes in acute care hospital design

2024· article· en· W4400288452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jessica Carolina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariable air volumeVolume (thermodynamics)Acute careVariable (mathematics)Noise (video)Noise controlControl (management)MedicineEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsEngineeringAir conditioningHealth careArtificial intelligenceNoise reductionMechanical engineeringPhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variable air volume boxes are frequently used within new acute care hospital design of heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems in Canada. Spatial and room-use noise limits as defined within the project requirements [PM1] are often necessarily onerous to provide acoustical conditions that promote well-being and patient recovery, with appropriate noise control design crucial to the success of meeting the project requirements. Additionally, the desire for fiber-free linings to ductwork exacerbates the noise control limitations. This paper will review the available noise control strategies, the acoustic performance of fiber-free variable air volume box types with and without an attenuator and identify cost-benefits to the Design-Builder. This study will demonstrate how the implementation of a variety of variable air volume box models, sizes, operating conditions, pressure drops are affecting the noise performance. This study will summarize the appropriate variable air volume box types and design conditions that meet the project noise limits used in Canadian healthcare standards such as CSA Z8000, LEED and other provincial technical guidelines.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207