MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415455726 · doi:10.3397/in_2025_1074737

Acoustic treatments with innovative panels produced from olive oil wastes

2025· article· en· W4415455726 on OpenAlexaff
Umberto Berardi, Gino Iannace, Antonella Bevilacqua, Amelia Trematerra

Bibliographic record

VenueNOISE-CON proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOlive treesOlive oilMediterranean climateAbsorption (acoustics)Sound (geography)Noise reduction coefficientElectrical impedanceEdible oil

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Mediterranean region, placing olive tree is a common practice. Historically, these trees were cultivated along the coasts of Magna Graecia, and today the European community is the largest global producer of olive oil. Spain accounts for 42% of production, followed by Italy with 17% and Greece with 11%. Olive oil has been traditionally extracted for food, cosmetics, medicine, and, in ancient times, also for lighting. One significant by-product of olive cultivation is the waste generated from cut tree trunks and foliage. This study aims to describe the possibility of utilizing these waste materials for sound absorption applications. The proposed system for the acoustic absorption involves triturating small trunks into particles ranging from 1.5 mm to 4 mm. The absorption coefficients were measured for samples with varying thicknesses, providing insights into the potential of these materials for sound absorption. This approach highlights a sustainable pathway for repurposing agricultural waste. Moving from the Delany-Bazley model, this study compares the impedance tube results with the theoretically predicted ones. Finally, using a least-square fit procedure based on the Nelder-Mead method, the coefficients that best predict both the acoustic impedance and the propagation constant laws are reported.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNOISE-CON proceedingsSame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207