A systematic review of prediction models for the experience of urban soundscapes

被引:61
|
作者
Lionello, Matteo [1 ]
Aletta, Francesco [1 ]
Kang, Jian [1 ]
机构
[1] Bartlett Univ Coll London, Inst Environm Design & Engn, Cent House,14 Upper Woburn Pl, London WC1H 0NN, England
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Soundscape modelling; Urban soundscape; Soundscape indices; Literature review; NOISE PREDICTION; CIRCUMPLEX MODEL; QUALITY; SPACES; CLASSIFICATION; ASSESSMENTS; MAPS;
D O I
10.1016/j.apacoust.2020.107479
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
A systematic review for soundscape modelling methods is presented. The methods for developing soundscape models are hereby questioned by investigating the following aspects: data acquisition methods, indicators used as predictors of descriptors in the models, descriptors targeted as output of the models, linear rather than non-linear model fitting, and overall performances. The inclusion criteria for the reviewed studies were: models dealing with soundscape dimensions aligned with the definitions provided in the ISO 12913 series; models based on soundscape data sampled at least at two different locations and using at least two variables as indicators. The Scopus database was queried. Biases on papers selection were considered and those related to the methods are discussed in the current study. Out of 256 results from Scopus, 22 studies were selected. Two studies were included from the references among the results. The data extraction from the 24 studies includes: data collection methods, input and output for the models, and model performance. Three main data collection methods were found. Several studies focus on the different combination of indicators among physical measurements, perceptual evaluations, temporal dynamics, demographic and psychological information, context information and visual amenity. The descriptors considered across the studies include: acoustic comfort, valence, arousal, calmness, chaoticness, sound quality, tranquillity, and vibrancy. The interpretation of the results is limited by the large variety of methods, and the large number of parameters in spite of a limited amount of studies obtained from the query. However, perceptual indicators, visual and contextual indicators, as well as time dynamic embedding, overall provide a better prediction of soundscape. Finally, although the compared performance between linear and non-linear methods does not show remarkable differences, non-linear methods might still represent a more suitable choice in models where complex structures of indicators are used. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Risk prediction models for breast cancer: a systematic review
    Zheng, Yadi
    Li, Jiang
    Wu, Zheng
    Li, He
    Cao, Maomao
    Li, Ni
    He, Jie
    BMJ OPEN, 2022, 12 (07):
  • [22] Risk Prediction Models for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
    Gray, Eoin P.
    Teare, M. Dawn
    Stevens, John
    Archer, Rachel
    CLINICAL LUNG CANCER, 2016, 17 (02) : 95 - 106
  • [23] Risk Prediction Models for Hospital Readmission A Systematic Review
    Kansagara, Devan
    Englander, Honora
    Salanitro, Amanda
    Kagen, David
    Theobald, Cecelia
    Freeman, Michele
    Kripalani, Sunil
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2011, 306 (15): : 1688 - 1698
  • [24] Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review
    Usher-Smith, Juliet A.
    Walter, Fiona M.
    Emery, Jon D.
    Win, Aung K.
    Griffin, Simon J.
    CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH, 2016, 9 (01) : 13 - 26
  • [25] A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF MORTALITY PREDICTION MODELS IN UNSELECTED POPULATIONS
    Col, Nananda
    Goldstein, Gregory
    Han, Paul
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2010, 25 : 215 - 216
  • [26] Systematic review of prediction models for gestational hypertension and preeclampsia
    Antwi, Edward
    Amoakoh-Coleman, Mary
    Vieira, Dorice L.
    Madhavaram, Shreya
    Koram, Kwadwo A.
    Grobbee, Diederick E.
    Agyepong, Irene A.
    Klipstein-Grobusch, Kerstin
    PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (04):
  • [27] Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review
    Lubelski, Daniel
    Hersh, Andrew
    Azad, Tej D.
    Ehresman, Jeff
    Pennington, Zachary
    Lehner, Kurt
    Sciubba, Daniel M.
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 11 (1_SUPP) : 79S - 88S
  • [28] Risk Prediction Models for Kidney Cancer: A Systematic Review
    Harrison, Hannah
    Thompson, Rachel E.
    Lin, Zhiyuan
    Rossi, Sabrina H.
    Stewart, Grant D.
    Griffin, Simon J.
    Usher-Smith, Juliet A.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2021, 7 (06): : 1380 - 1390
  • [29] Explainable Student Performance Prediction Models: A Systematic Review
    Alamri, Rahaf
    Alharbi, Basma
    IEEE ACCESS, 2021, 9 : 33132 - 33143
  • [30] Risk Prediction Models for Oral Cancer: A Systematic Review
    Espressivo, Aufia
    Pan, Z. Sienna
    Usher-Smith, Juliet A.
    Harrison, Hannah
    CANCERS, 2024, 16 (03)