几类典型环境声的主观评价及感知特性分析

近年来,通过“注入”调控声以降低交通噪声烦恼感的声频注入法受到广泛关注。以交通噪声调控研究为背景,通过成对比较评价了4类典型声音(实验一)和4类典型交通噪声(实验二)的烦恼感。结果表明,有调声(纯音和复音)烦恼度最高,自然声最低(海潮声最佳),蓝色噪声是仅次于海潮声令人感觉舒适的声音;被试对交通噪声和白噪声的评价存在明显的分类偏好。分析心理声学特征发现人对声音的感知依赖于多方面因素,但声刺激的某一因素(如粗糙度或音调特别高)特别突出则会引起极大的反感。构建不相似度二维感知空间,维度1反映了声音类型间的差异,维度2表征了被试对不同类型声音的烦恼度评价;并且通过相关分析发现它们与谱结构参量相关性较强。接下来的研究中,可以通过调整交通噪声的谱下降值和时域上升时间等参量使其谱结构更接近于自然声,从而降低噪声烦恼度。     

基于双耳自相关函数的车辆噪声烦恼度研究

利用主成分分析法研究车辆噪声的双耳自相关函数(ACF)因子,确定了车辆噪声的原始听感与决定其代表性听觉感知属性的主导听感,并从各类听感描述因子与基本因子的变化规律角度,分析了车辆噪声主观烦恼度的形成机制.首先,依据车辆噪声的ACF特性,对既有ACF因子理论进行了补充和完善;提出平均起伏度(EMD)与包络衰减率(ESM)...     

城市道路交通噪声烦恼度社会调查

本文以烦恼度为主观反应指标,采用三种5级程度衡量尺度,对西安市内三条主要干道和两类典型交叉口附近区域内的道路交通噪声进行了烦恼度问卷调查。此次调查针对人口统计学因素(性别、年龄、文化程度、身体健康状况)上的个体差异与等级描述词不同的程度尺度可能对道路交通噪声烦恼度调查结果的影响,以及特定路况条件下的噪声烦恼度与不同机动车辆的行驶噪声烦恼度展开了研究。通过对调查数据的分析处理,发现并初步总结出:与选取不同的烦恼度尺度相比,人口统计学因素对调查结果的影响更加显著;人口统计学因素与特定路况条件下的噪声烦恼度及不同机动车辆的行驶噪声烦恼度无明显相关;但不同机动车辆的行驶噪声烦恼度不同,实际研究中需对摩托车噪声加以重视并区别对待。     

汉语语境下的车辆噪声听觉属性评价与分析

研究了等响度车辆噪声听觉属性的空间维度及其汉语表述.首先通过问卷调查确定评价车辆噪声听觉属性的汉语描述词,然后完成基于成对比较法和语义细分法的主观评价实验,获得听觉属性的不相似度矩阵及描述词的等级顺序.最后,利用多维尺度分析和主成分分析法得到独立的用中文表达的车辆噪声听觉属性,结果表明:对于等响度的车辆噪声,其听觉属性可以用三个维度表示,分别用"粗糙"、"刺耳"和"起伏"描述.     

多噪声源共同作用下的总烦恼度评价与预测

主要研究了多噪声源共同作用下的混合噪声烦恼度的评价过程与预测方法. 首先, 设计并完成了固定播放时长噪声样本作用下的烦恼度主观评价实验, 获得了人工合成的混合噪声样本作用下的混合噪声烦恼度(亦称总烦恼度) α_T 评价数据与构成混合噪声样本的所有单一噪声样本单独作用时的烦恼度α_i (i=1, 2, 3, ···, K; K为混合噪声样本中单一噪声样本的总数) 评价数据. 随后, 细致分析了两组评价数据之间的关系, 提出在已知α_i 的基础上利用多元线性回归模型预测α_T. 最后, 解决了如何确定模型中对应各α_i的权值ω_i (i=1, 2, 3, ···, K) 的问题. 研究表明, 以所提出的权值确定方法建立的多元线性回归预测模型 能够较为成功地预测混合噪声样本作用下的总烦恼度评价值.     

混合算法优化的乘用车舱内噪声感知烦恼度神经网络建模

针对传统乘用车舱内噪声感知烦恼度量化模型精度低的问题,提出了一种利用混合算法优化的神经网络模型预测舱内噪声感知烦恼度的评价方法。此混合算法融合麻雀搜索算法(SSA)和遗传算法(GA),对反向传播(BP)神经网络进行优化,根据声品质主客观评价数据,建立SSA-GA-BP网络的乘用车舱内噪声感知烦恼度客观量化模型,与BP模型、GA-BP模型、SSA-BP模型进行对比分析。结果表明, SSA-GA-BP模型能够实现更高的预测精度,更接近主观评价数值,泛化能力更强,可替代传统的声品质主观评价实验。     

基于听觉中枢模型的水下噪声音色表达与特性分析

为建立水下噪声音色特征的定量表达以用于目标识别, 本文将主观评价实验获得的 4个本质音色维度得分与声音的听觉中枢响应建立联系, 得到音色的偏最小二乘回归模型, 并基于回归系数对每个维度进行物理分析. 为验证该方法的有效性, 本文提取大量音色描述符作为自变量进行对比, 结果表明听觉中枢模型预测能力有一定优势. 同时发现, 前 3个本质音色维度可分别由高频能量比例、谱平坦程度和时域连续性描述, 而第4 维度则无法与任何声学特征建立联系. 关键词： 本质音色 听觉中枢模型 偏最小二乘回归 音色描述符     

环境噪声对儿童短时记忆力和注意力的影响

通过实验室研究探讨了不同噪声源在不同声压级条件下对儿童短时记忆力和注意力的影响。在每一个实验中都选取了30名710岁的儿童作为被试,在他们完成相应认知任务的同时,用耳机随机播放3565 dBA的交通噪声、白噪声和空调噪声,考察各种噪声条件对被试认知成绩和主观烦恼度的影响。研究结果表明,噪声对儿童的影响主要体现在主观烦恼度的变化上,不同的噪声条件并没有引起作业成绩的显著差异。影响儿童主观烦恼度的主要因素是声压级,随着声压级的增大,儿童的烦恼度会增加,当声压级在4550 dBA时,儿童对噪声开始产生烦恼感,当声压级在6065 dBA时,儿童对噪声产生了较显著的烦恼感。声压级对儿童烦恼度的影响没有随着噪声源的改变而改变。在相同的噪声条件下,短时记忆力实验中儿童的主观烦恼度都高于注意力实验,说明随着认知过程复杂程度的增加,噪声引起的烦恼度会相应增加。      

听觉感知中的噪声特性语义描述及其分析

基于听觉感知的噪声语义描述是噪声声品质研究的基础性问题,已有研究未将语义描述与噪声来源、频谱特性以及产品运行状态等物理信息联系起来。该文分别针对飞机舱内噪声、车辆噪声和空气净化器噪声这3组典型噪声开展了主观评价实验,并通过多维尺度分析和主成分分析描述了3组噪声的语义空间,系统分析了不同类型噪声的描述词,同时解释了描述词与噪声物理属性之间的联系。研究发现：飞机舱内噪声、车辆噪声以及空气净化器噪声可以由4维、4维和3维语义空间进行描述;不同类型噪声在语义描述中具有共性与个性,3组噪声语义的主要维度均与嘈杂感相关,而噪声的个性描述词与其声源的物理属性密切相关;进行声品质建模及应用时,应同时考虑噪声共性和个性描述词对听觉感知的影响,采取有针对性的措施以提升产品声品质。该文从听觉感知的角度进行了噪声特性的语义描述和分析,研究结果可为产品声品质以及噪声控制研究提供帮助。     

基于掩蔽特性的噪声品质评估研究

针对宽带噪声的频谱特点和人耳听觉的掩蔽特性,提出了一种噪声掩蔽的等效原则,以及一种新的烦恼度指数的计算方法。在采用时频分析的方法,结合统计学规律,辨识出噪声中致人烦恼的频率成份之后,利用该烦恼度指数可度量各频率成份的烦恼程度,从而建立了一种噪声品质评估模型。试验研究的结果表明:基于掩蔽特性的噪声品质评估模型可以快捷而准确地识别噪声中烦恼的频率成份,并与人耳主观辨识的结果具有良好的一致性。     

The differing annoyance levels of rail and road traffic noise

The results of a study on the relative annoyance by rail or road traffic noise in urban and rural areas are reported. Fourteen areas with rail and road traffic noise with differing levels of loudness (L_eq) were investigated. The annoyance was assessed by means of a questionnaire. The analysis of the relationship between annoyance and L_eq—performed separately for rail and road traffic noise—shows that the same amount of annoyance is reached for railway traffic noise at L_eq levels 4–5 dB(A) higher than for road traffic noise (railway/traffic noise “bonus”). The estimation for the difference values vary for the different variables of annoyance. Furthermore, the difference levels tend to be higher in urban than in rural areas.     

Annoyance response to mixed transportation noise in Hong Kong

To better understand mixed transportation noise-annoyance response, a study was undertaken in Hong Kong to (1) unravel factors affecting annoyance response to mixed transportation noise; (2) contrast noise-annoyance relationships between road traffic and railway noise dominant situations; and (3) explain the differences, if any, between the two using structural equation modelling from the data collected in a social survey. Results of this study show that annoyance is largely determined by noise disturbance and perceived noisiness. Personal noise sensitivity, attitudes towards different means of transport and perceived quality of the living environment are secondary contributing factors. When road traffic noise dominates, annoyance is primarily determined by noise disturbance caused by the peaks of railway noise events; when railway noise dominates, peaks of train events can induce annoyance response directly without causing disturbance. Policy implications of such results on how to minimize noise-annoyance response are discussed in the paper.     

Road traffic noise - the relationship between noise exposure and noise annoyance in Norway

Exposure-effect relationships between the level of road traffic noise at the most exposed side of a dwelling's façade and the residents' reactions to road traffic noise have been estimated. The relationships are based on five Norwegian socio-acoustic studies featuring 18 study areas from two cities and a total of near 4000 respondents. The survey questionnaires distinguish between noise annoyance experienced right outside the apartment and when indoors. Exposure-effect relationships for all degrees of annoyance are estimated simultaneously from ordinal logit models. These predict road traffic noise annoyance when right outside the apartment and when indoors, respectively, as a function of the road traffic noise level outside the most exposed façade. Separate analyses indicate that Norwegians react stronger to road traffic noise than results from a recent compilation of socio-acoustic surveys would lead one to believe. People having inferior single glazing windows report higher indoor annoyance.     

Annoyance and disturbance of daily activities from road traffic noise in Canada

This study evaluated road traffic noise annoyance in Canada in relation to activity interference, subject concerns about noise and self-reported distance to a major road. Random digit dialing was employed to survey a representative sample of 2565 Canadians 15 years of age and older. Respondents highly annoyed by traffic noise were significantly more likely to perceive annoyance to negatively impact health, live closer to a heavily traveled road and report that traffic noise often interfered with daily activities. Sex, age, education level, community size and province had statistically significant associations with traffic noise annoyance. High noise annoyance consistently correlated with frequent interference of activities. Reducing noise at night (10 pm-7 am) was more important than during the rest of the day.     

Relationship between exposure to multiple noise sources and noise annoyance

Relationships between exposure to noise [metric: day-night level (DNL) or day-evening-night level (DENL)] from a single source (aircraft, road traffic, or railways) and annoyance based on a large international dataset have been published earlier. Also for stationary sources relationships have been assessed. Here the annoyance equivalents model concerning noise annoyance from combined sources and the underlying assumptions are presented. The model first translates the noise from the individual sources into the equally annoying sound levels of a reference source, road traffic, and then sums these levels giving total level L. The annoyance from the combined sources is found by substituting exposure L in the road traffic exposure-annoyance relationship. The most important assumption, independence of the contributions of the sources, is discussed. It appears that independence will be violated substantially only due to the effect of the presence or absence of a quiet side of building which is not incorporated in the model. For use in practice the application of the model is broken down in five steps. The step by step procedure can be used for the assessment of the total noise level and the associated total annoyance on the basis of the DNL or DENL values of the individual sources.     

Role of community tolerance level (CTL) in predicting the prevalence of the annoyance of road and rail noise

Fidell et al. [(2011), J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130(2), 791-806] have shown (1) that the rate of growth of annoyance with noise exposure reported in attitudinal surveys of the annoyance of aircraft noise closely resembles the exponential rate of change of loudness with sound level, and (2) that the proportion of a community highly annoyed and the variability in annoyance prevalence rates in communities are well accounted for by a simple model with a single free parameter: a community tolerance level (abbreviated CTL, and represented symbolically in mathematical expressions as L(ct)), expressed in units of DNL. The current study applies the same modeling approach to predicting the prevalence of annoyance of road traffic and rail noise. The prevalence of noise-induced annoyance of all forms of transportation noise is well accounted for by a simple, loudness-like exponential function with community-specific offsets. The model fits all of the road traffic findings well, but the prevalence of annoyance due to rail noise is more accurately predicted separately for interviewing sites with and without high levels of vibration and/or rattle.     

Some developments in community response research since the second international workshop on railway and tracked transit system noise in 1978

As far as human responses to railway noise are concerned, knowledge has increased considerably since the Second International Workshop on Railway and Tracked Transit System Noise was held in Lyon, France, in October 1978. Only some developments are mentioned in this article. Concerning land use planning some evidence became available that in maintaining or recovering a certain amount of well-being the concept of noise zoning deserves most attention, and that applying heavier sound insulation measures is not sufficient in solving the problem of noise annoyance. About the influence of background noise on annoyance, data from railway noise surveys are not conclusive. Whether or not habituation to noise occurs seems to be dependent on the way it has been made operational. Neither the often used self-reported habituation nor length of residence appears to have a clear relation with annoyance. Noise from shunting yards appears to be very annoying, compared with noise from through trains, road traffic and aircraft. The characteristics of the noise causing this relatively high degree of annoyance are still subject to study. “Normal” through trains cause less annoyance than road traffic and aircraft, the noise levels being equal. Some specific disturbances, however, like for instance being disturbed while watching television or having a conversation, occur at lower noise levels with railway noise than with road traffic noise.     

Comparison of dose-response relationships between railway and road traffic noises: the moderating effect of distance

It has been found in European studies that railway noise causes less annoyance than road traffic noise. However, recent Japanese studies have shown that there is no systematic difference in dose-response relationships between railway and road traffic noises. In general Japanese houses are situated closer to railways or roads than European houses. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether the distance from noise source to houses influences community responses to railway and road traffic noises. A re-analysis was made of data from social surveys on community responses to railway and road traffic noises, which have been obtained from 1994 to 2001 in Kyushu, a warmer area of Japan and Hokkaido, a colder area. The results showed that the annoyance in areas close to railways was greater than that in distant areas, while there was no difference in dose-response relationships for road traffic noise between both areas. Considering the situation of houses in Europe and Japan, it is expected that the annoyance caused by railway noise is more severe in Japan than in Europe. The distance from noise source to houses may be one of the causes of the difference in community responses between Europe and Japan.