Measured and predicted sound transmission through a laboratory concrete floor
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
The direct sound transmission through a simple, massive, homogeneous building element with and without lining is investigated experimentally and compared with analytical and empirical models from the literature. A 150 mm thick concrete floor and a 100 mm thick floating floor were measured in the floor transmission facility of the National Research Council Canada, i.e. without flanking sound transmission. In addition to the sound reduction index and the normalized impact sound pressure level, loss factors, radiation efficiencies, and mean squared velocities were recorded in the laboratory. The measured data is compared to established models of sound transmission. A focus is placed on the calculation model of ISO 12354-1 (Appendix B), which uses calculated radiation efficiencies and loss factors to predict the sound reduction index of heavy, homogeneous building elements. Some difficulties with the calculation model and the examples in the standard are discussed. In principle, the results in this study show that the calculation model of ISO 12354-1 gives good estimates when the correct input parameters are used. However, deviations between the calculated and the measured loss factors and radiation efficiencies have large effects on the accuracy of the estimates, particularly in the region around the coincidence frequency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it