Dependency between standardized heavy impact sound pressure level and receiving room properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low frequency impact sound is a common problem in residential buildings. Japan and Korea acknowledge this issue in their standards (JIS 1418-2, KS F 2810-2) with test protocols for measuring low frequency impact sound using two unique heavy impact sources. One is a well-defined small car tire - the ?bang-machine? - and the other is a rubber ball. Both are dropped from defined heights on the floor under investigation. In the receiving room the fast-weighted maximum sound pressure level of the generated sound impulse is averaged over several drop and receiver positions. As opposed to the light impact standards (JIS 1418-1, KS F 2810-1), the receiving room properties, namely volume and absorption, are not taken into account during post processing of measurement data. Results of a recent study, in which nominally identical floors were tested in two facilities that differ grossly in volume and absorption, are be presented in this paper. A dependency between the measured heavy impact sound pressure levels and the receiving room properties was established. Thus, measured data must be normalized to volume and absorption to allow a comparison of heavy impact sound ratings of different facilities or in-situ. For the normalization to the room volume, an existing method of other protocols (ISO 10140 for quasi-stationary impact sound) was applied to heavy impact sound data and validated. However, for absorption the existing methods failed. A new normalization term was derived theoretically for the fast-weighted maximum sound pressure level of a sound impulse and validated with heavy impact sound measurements.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".