A fuzzy rule based framework for noise annoyance modeling

Predicting the effect of noise on individual people and small groups is an extremely difficult task due to the influence of a multitude of factors that vary from person to person and from context to context. Moreover, noise annoyance is inherently a vague concept. That is why, in this paper, it is argued that noise annoyance models should identify a fuzzy set of possible effects rather than seek a very accurate crisp prediction. Fuzzy rule based models seem ideal candidates for this task. This paper provides the theoretical background for building these models. Existing empirical knowledge is used to extract a few typical rules that allow making the model more specific for small groups of individuals. The resulting model is tested on two large-scale social surveys augmented with exposure simulations. The testing demonstrates how this new way of thinking about noise effect modeling can be used in practice both in management support as a "noise annoyance adviser" and in social science for testing hypotheses such as the effect of noise sensitivity or the degree of urbanization.     

Fuzzy models for accumulation of reported community noise annoyance from combined sources

Many scientists have investigated noise annoyance caused by combined sources. However, general annoyance reported in a social survey still has many unknown features. In this work the cognitive process involved in coming to a general noise rating based on a known, in context, rating of annoyance by particular sources is studied. A comparison of classical and fuzzy models is used for this. The new fuzzy linguistic models give a meaning to the successful strongest component or dominant source model that was used in previous work. They also explain to some extent particular features not included in that previous model. The variance not predicted by the fuzzy linguistic model is contrasted with personal data of the test subjects (age, gender, and education level) and the context of the question in the questionnaire. Only age seems to play a significant role.     

Testing a theory of aircraft noise annoyance: a structural equation analysis

Previous research has stressed the relevance of nonacoustical factors in the perception of aircraft noise. However, it is largely empirically driven and lacks a sound theoretical basis. In this paper, a theoretical model which explains noise annoyance based on the psychological stress theory is empirically tested. The model is estimated by applying structural equation modeling based on data from residents living in the vicinity of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol in The Netherlands. The model provides a good model fit and indicates that concern about the negative health effects of noise and pollution, perceived disturbance, and perceived control and coping capacity are the most important variables that explain noise annoyance. Furthermore, the model provides evidence for the existence of two reciprocal relationships between (1) perceived disturbance and noise annoyance and (2) perceived control and coping capacity and noise annoyance. Lastly, the model yielded two unexpected results. Firstly, the variables noise sensitivity and fear related to the noise source were unable to explain additional variance in the endogenous variables of the model and were therefore excluded from the model. And secondly, the size of the total effect of noise exposure on noise annoyance was relatively small. The paper concludes with some recommended directions for further research.     

Are our noise laws adequate?

Britain has a number of laws and regulations which are aimed at controlling excessive noise. These laws appear to be based on the assumption that everyone reacts in a similar manner when exposed to noise, and the criteria which the laws use are concerned with establishing at what ‘level’ of noise exposure the ‘average’ person is likely to suffer annoyance.In this paper we examine some of the available evidence on how individuals react to noise, and demonstrate that the concept of the ‘average’ person is relatively meaningless. This conclusion further indicates that the criteria for noise control are inadequate in that, for a substantial number of people, they do not provide the protection intended. It is shown that not only is there a wide ‘spread’ in the degree of annoyance due to noise, but also the population tends to show inhomogeneity in the nature of its response. There seem to be at least two types of person, one who ‘learns to live with’ the noise, and gradually adapts to it, and another type who becomes progressively more disturbed by it, or, it could be said, is ‘sensitive to noise’. There is also evidence that, in some circumstances, factors relating to the individual can be more valuable in predicting the response to noise than is the nature of the noise itself.These findings imply that, for adequate protection of the individual against annoying noise, we must not only study the noise, but also the personality and personal factors of the individual.     

Exposure-effect relationships between road traffic noise annoyance and noise cost valuations in Valladolid, Spain

Environmental noise can produce negative effects on people’s health since it interferes with basic activities such as sleeping, resting, studying and communicating. These effects depend not only on the physical characteristics of the noise itself, but also on parameters associated to each person and each environment. It is thus important to study noise pollution from a quantitative point of view as well as a from the point of view of the annoyance that it produces in the population.We have conducted a social survey aiming to identify the main sound sources, evaluate the annoyance and analyse the main effects of noise on people. The survey was distributed to a sample of people living approximately in the corners of an imaginary 250 m grid placed over the map of the city of Valladolid (Spain). The same corners were used to perform in situ measurements for a noise city map.There are two main purposes for this research work: (1) we want to compare the objective noise measurements to the annoyance reported by the people in order to find some kind of dose-effect relationship, and (2) we want to analyse how the population of Valladolid evaluates noise reduction from an economical and social point of view.     

The relationship between railway noise and community annoyance in Korea

A study of community annoyance caused by exposures to railway noise was carried out in 18 areas along railway lines to accumulate social survey data and assess the relationship between railway noise levels and annoyance responses in Korea. Railway noise levels were measured with portable sound-level meters. Social surveys were administered to people living within 50 m of noise measurement sites. A questionnaire contained demographic factors, degree of noise annoyance, interference with daily activities, and health-related symptoms. The question relating to noise annoyance was answered on an 11-point numerical scale. The randomly selected respondents, who were aged between 18 to 70 years of age, completed the questionnaire independently. In total, 726 respondents participated in social surveys. Taking into consideration the urban structure and layout of the residential areas of Korea, Japan, and Europe, one can assume that the annoyance responses caused by the railway noise in this study will be similar to those found in Japan, which are considerably more severe than those found in European countries. This study showed that one of the most important factors contributing to the difference in the annoyance responses between Korea and Europe is the distance between railways and houses.     

Noise sensitivity and reactions to noise and other environmental conditions

This article integrates findings from the literature and new results regarding noise sensitivity. The new results are based on analyses of 28 combined datasets (N = 23,038), and separate analyses of a large aircraft noise study (N = 10,939). Three topics regarding noise sensitivity are discussed, namely, its relationship with noise exposure, its working mechanism, and the scope of its influence. (1) A previous review found that noise sensitivity has no relationship with noise exposure. The current analyses give consistent results, and show that there is at most a very weak positive relationship. (2) It was observed earlier that noise sensitivity alters the effect of noise exposure on noise annoyance, and does not (only) have an additive effect. The current analyses confirm this, and show that the relation of the annoyance score with the noise exposure is relatively flat for nonsensitives while it is steeper for sensitives. (3) Previous studies showed that noise sensitivity also influences reactions other than noise annoyance. The current analyses of the aircraft noise study extend these results, but also indicate that noise sensitivity has relatively little influence on reactions to nonenvironmental conditions.     

Laboratory annoyance and different traffic noise sources

The acute annoyance reaction to different noise sources (lorries, aircraft, mopeds and trains) was investigated in a laboratory experiment. Students were exposed to different noise climates at noise levels 70 and 80 dB(A) for 25 minutes, and their reactions were subsequently assessed by using a questionnaire. Their general sensitivity to noise was also evaluated. The results demonstrated that L_eq gave the best correlation with annoyance. However, lorry noise was found to be less disturbing than aircraft noise at the same L_eq value. This was more pronounced if the different noises were compared at equal peak dB(A) levels. The results suggest that other factors such as the irregularity of the noise or the individual experience of the noise are of importance for the annoyance reaction. A relationship was found between the general annoyance score and annoyance reactions in the laboratory. Questionnaires could thus be a suitable tool for identifying noise sensitive persons.     

A comparison between exposure-response relationships for wind turbine annoyance and annoyance due to other noise sources

Surveys have shown that noise from wind turbines is perceived as annoying by a proportion of residents living in their vicinity, apparently at much lower noise levels than those inducing annoyance due to other environmental sources. The aim of the present study was to derive the exposure-response relationship between wind turbine noise exposure in L(den) and the expected percentage annoyed residents and to compare it to previously established relationships for industrial noise and transportation noise. In addition, the influence of several individual and situational factors was assessed. On the basis of available data from two surveys in Sweden (N=341, N=754) and one survey in the Netherlands (N=725), a relationship was derived for annoyance indoors and for annoyance outdoors at the dwelling. In comparison to other sources of environmental noise, annoyance due to wind turbine noise was found at relatively low noise exposure levels. Furthermore, annoyance was lower among residents who received economical benefit from wind turbines and higher among residents for whom the wind turbine was visible from the dwelling. Age and noise sensitivity had similar effects on annoyance to those found in research on annoyance by other sources.     

Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise--a dose-response relationship

Installed global wind power increased by 26% during 2003, with U.S and Europe accounting for 90% of the cumulative capacity. Little is known about wind turbines' impact on people living in their vicinity. The aims of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of annoyance due to wind turbine noise and to study dose-response relationships. Interrelationships between noise annoyance and sound characteristics, as well as the influence of subjective variables such as attitude and noise sensitivity, were also assessed. A cross-sectional study was performed in Sweden in 2000. Responses were obtained through questionnaires (n = 351; response rate 68.4%), and doses were calculated as A-weighted sound pressure levels for each respondent. A statistically significant dose-response relationship was found, showing higher proportion of people reporting perception and annoyance than expected from the present dose-response relationships for transportation noise. The unexpected high proportion of annoyance could be due to visual interference, influencing noise annoyance, as well as the presence of intrusive sound characteristics. The respondents' attitude to the visual impact of wind turbines on the landscape scenery was found to influence noise annoyance.     

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.     

Annoyance of noise stimuli in relation to the spatial factors extracted from the interaural cross-correlation function

While considering auditory-brain model for subjective responses, effects of spatial factors extracted from the interaural cross-correlation function (IACF) on annoyance of noise stimuli are examined. The previously developed indices to measure sound pressure levels (SPL) and frequency characteristics cannot fully explain the psychological effects of noise. In the first experiment, subjects judged their annoyance by changing fluctuations in the magnitude of interaural cross-correlation function (IACC) and the SPL. In the second, they judged their annoyance by changing fluctuations in the interaural time delay (τ_IACC) and the SPL. Results show that: (1) annoyance increased by increasing the fluctuations of IACC as well as the SPL, (2) annoyance increased by increasing the fluctuations of τ_IACC as well as the SPL.     

Annoyance caused by noise from shooting ranges

This paper reports results from a study of annoyance due to noise from shooting ranges. The results show that annoyance is low up to a certain threshold after which it increases relatively quickly. This threshold varies with the choice of exposure measurement, but the covariation between exposure and annoyance is relatively similar and shows by and large the same tendency. An increase in number of shots fired does not increase the extent of annoyance. When the exposure is measured in dB(A) Fast the threshold for annoyance seems to be about 60–65 dB(A).     

Activity interference and noise annoyance

Debate continues over differences in the dose-response functions used to predict the annoyance at different sources of transportation noise. This debate reflects the lack of an accepted model of noise annoyance in residential communities. In this paper a model is proposed which is focussed on activity interference as a central component mediating the relationship between noise exposure and annoyance. This model represents a departure from earlier models in two important respects. First, single event noise levels (e.g., maximum levels, sound exposure level) constitute the noise exposure variables in place of long-term energy equivalent measures (e.g., 24-hour L_eq or L_dn). Second, the relationships within the model are expressed as probabilistic rather than deterministic equations. The model has been tested by using acoustical and social survey data collected at 57 sites in the Toronto region exposed to aircraft, road traffic or train noise. Logit analysis was used to estimate two sets of equations. The first predicts the probability of activity interference as a function of event noise level. Four types of interference are included: indoor speech, outdoor speech, difficulty getting to sleep and awakening. The second set predicts the probability of annoyance as a function of the combination of activity interferences. From the first set of equations, it was possible to estimate a function for indoor speech interference only. In this case, the maximum event level was the strongest predictor. The lack of significant results for the other types of interference is explained by the limitations of the data. The same function predicts indoor speech interference for all three sources—road, rail and aircraft noise. The results for the second set of equations show strong relationships between activity interference and the probability of annoyance. Again, the parameters of the logit equations are similar for the three sources. A trial application of the model predicts a higher probability of annoyance for aircraft than for road traffic situations with the same 24-hour L_eq. This result suggests that the model may account for previously reported source differences in annoyance.     

Annoyance with aircraft noise in local recreational areas and the recreationists' noise situation at home

Few socioacoustic studies have examined the effect of noise on outdoor recreationists. Most studies concentrate on one setting of the everyday life of a noise-exposed population, which mainly has been the residential setting. This article relates annoyance with aircraft noise in outdoor recreational areas to the recreationists' noise situation at home. In conjunction with the relocation of the main airport of Norway in 1998, field studies were conducted before and after the change in one area near the old airport (1930 survey respondents), and one area near the new airport (1001 survey respondents). Multivariate linear regression analyses of the relationship between annoyance and aircraft noise exposure (LAeq for the aircraft events) in the recreational areas were conducted, controlled for noise annoyance at home, or aircraft noise exposure at home, the situation (before/ after the change), context- and demographic variables. People more highly annoyed at home tended to be more annoyed than others while in the recreational areas. A significant effect of aircraft noise exposure at home on annoyance in the recreational setting was not found. More research is warranted regarding the relationship between noise exposure at home and outdoor recreational demands.     

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.     

Aircraft noise annoyance modeling: Consideration of noise sensitivity and of different annoying acoustical characteristics

Noise annoyance due to aircraft flyover noise was assessed under laboratory conditions. The main objectives of the study were: (i) to identify influential acoustical features of noise annoyance, (ii) to propose noise indices to characterize these acoustical features and (iii) to enhance annoyance models including influential acoustical and non-acoustical variables. Therefore, a verbalization task was performed by the participants of the experiment to collect their whole impression concerning the aircraft flyover noises for which they rated annoyance. This verbalization task highlights that noise annoyance was influenced by three main acoustical features: (i) the spectral content, (ii) the temporal variation and (iii) the perceived sound intensity. Four combinations of noise indices were used to propose multilevel annoyance models, in combination with the individual noise sensitivity. Noise sensitivity was found to highly contribute to annoyance models and should therefore be considered in future studies dealing with noise annoyance due to aircraft noise. Different combinations of noise indices coupled with noise sensitivity were found to be promising for future studies that aim to enhance current annoyance models.     

A first-principles model for estimating the prevalence of annoyance with aircraft noise exposure

Numerous relationships between noise exposure and transportation noise-induced annoyance have been inferred by curve-fitting methods. The present paper develops a different approach. It derives a systematic relationship by applying an a priori, first-principles model to the findings of forty three studies of the annoyance of aviation noise. The rate of change of annoyance with day-night average sound level (DNL) due to aircraft noise exposure was found to closely resemble the rate of change of loudness with sound level. The agreement of model predictions with the findings of recent curve-fitting exercises (cf. Miedma and Vos, 1998) is noteworthy, considering that other analyses have relied on different analytic methods and disparate data sets. Even though annoyance prevalence rates within individual communities consistently grow in proportion to duration-adjusted loudness, variability in annoyance prevalence rates across communities remains great. The present analyses demonstrate that 1) community-specific differences in annoyance prevalence rates can be plausibly attributed to the joint effect of acoustic and non-DNL related factors and (2) a simple model can account for the aggregate influences of non-DNL related factors on annoyance prevalence rates in different communities in terms of a single parameter expressed in DNL units-a "community tolerance level."