MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402586459 · doi:10.1061/jaeied.aeeng-1838

Apparent Impact Sound Insulation Performance of Continuous Floating Concrete Toppings on Mass Timber Slab Floors

2024· article· en· W4402586459 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Architectural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoundproofingSlabStructural engineeringSound (geography)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringGeologyGeotechnical engineeringAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mass timber panels including cross-laminated timber (CLT), dowel-laminated timber (DLT), and nail-laminated timber (NLT) are used increasingly as floor slabs in mass timber buildings and hybrid timber buildings. The sound insulation performance of bare mass timber structural floors is insufficient due to their lightweight and relatively high bending stiffness. Floating concrete toppings are commonly applied for improved sound insulation performance with an elastic interlayer. The effect of different elastic interlayers and thickness of concrete toppings on improving the impact sound insulation performance was investigated experimentally according to ASTM standards in this study. The results showed that with the same elastic layer, thicker concrete toppings resulted in better impact sound insulation performance with a higher apparent impact insulation class (AIIC). However, by increasing the concrete thickness from 38 to 50 mm and to 70 mm, the improvement of AIIC between two thicknesses was only within 3, and a significant improvement up to 9 was observed with a 100-mm-thick concrete topping. In general, elastic interlayers with lower dynamic stiffness values performed better; however, the performance was product dependent though the apparent dynamic stiffness was measured using the same standard method. Moreover, with the same panel thickness and wood species, a bare DLT floor provided higher AIIC (35) than a bare CLT (21), but each mass timber floor with the same interlayer and floating concrete topping had the same impact sound attenuation performance. The ISO empirical prediction equation overestimated the impact sound attenuation of floating concrete toppings on mass timber floors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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