Measurement of the cosmic ray antiproton/proton flux ratio at TeV energies with the ARGO-YBJ detector

Cosmic ray antiprotons provide an important probe to study the cosmic ray propagation in the interstellar space and to investigate the existence of dark matter. Acting the Earth-Moon system as a magnetic spectrometer, paths of primary antiprotons are deflected in the opposite sense with respect to those of the protons in their way to the Earth. This effect allows, in principle, the search for antiparticles in the direction opposite to the observed deficit of cosmic rays due to the Moon (the so-called `Moon shadow'). The ARGO-YBJ experiment, located at the Yangbajing Cosmic Ray Laboratory (Tibet, P.R. China, 4300 m a.s.l., 606 g/cm$^2$), is particularly effective in measuring the cosmic ray antimatter content via the observation of the cosmic rays shadowing effect due to: (1) good angular resolution, pointing accuracy and long-term stability; (2) low energy threshold; (3) real sensitivity to the geomagnetic field. Based on all the data recorded during the period from July 2006 through November 2009 and on a full Monte Carlo simulation, we searched for the existence of the shadow cast by antiprotons in the TeV energy region. No evidence of the existence of antiprotons is found in this energy region. Upper limits to the $\bar{p}/p$ flux ratio are set to 5 % at a median energy of 1.4 TeV and 6 % at 5 TeV with a confidence level of 90%. In the TeV energy range these limits are the lowest available.Comment: Contact authors: G. Di Sciascio ([email protected]) and R. Iuppa ([email protected]), INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Ital

Theoretical Predictions and Actual Hearing Threshold Levels in Workers Exposed to Ultrasonic Noise of Impulsive Character—A Pilot Study

Results of standard pure-tone audiom etry (PTA) were collected from 25 workers, mainly females, aged 23–58 years, exposed for 2–13 years to ultrasonic noise emitted by ultrasonic welders. Hearing tests were completed by evaluation of exposure to ultrasonic noise. The subjects’ actual audiometric hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with theoretical predictions calculated according to ISO 1999:1990. In 60% of cases sound pressure levels in the 10–40 kHz 1/3-octave bands at workstands exceeded Polish exposure limits for ultrasonic noise. Our comparison of predicted and measured HTLs suggests that the ISO 1999:1990 method, intended for audible noise, might also make it possible to predict reliably permanent hearing loss (in the 2 000–6 000 Hz frequency range) after exposure to ultrasonic noise. No significant progress of hearing impairment (assessed using PTA) in the operators of ultrasonic welders was noted. Nevertheless, further studies on the hearing status of workers exposed to ultrasonic noise are needed

Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Professional Orchestral Musicians

The overall purpose of this study was to assess hearing status in professional orchestral musicians. Standard pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) were per- formed in 126 orchestral musicians. Occupational and non-occupational risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) were identified in questionnaire inquiry. Data on sound pressure levels produced by various groups of instruments were also collected and analyzed. Measured hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with the theoretical predictions calculated according to ISO 1999 (1990). Musicians were exposed to excessive sound at weekly noise exposure levels of for 81-100 dB (mean: 86.6±4.0 dB) for 5-48 years (mean: 24.0±10.7 years). Most of them (95%) had hearing corresponds to grade 0 of hearing impairment (mean hearing threshold level at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz lower than 25 dB). However, high frequency notched audiograms typical for noise-induced hearing loss were found in 35% of cases. Simultaneously, about 35% of audiograms showed typical for NIHL high frequency notches (mainly occurring at 6000 Hz). When analyzing the impact of age, gender and noise exposure on hearing test results both PTA and TEOAE consistently showed better hearing in females vs. males, younger vs. older musicians. But higher exposure to orchestral noise was not associated with poorer hearing tests results. The musician’s audiometric hearing threshold levels were poorer than equivalent non-noise-exposed population and better (at 3000 and 4000 Hz) than expected for noise-exposed population according to ISO 1999 (1990). Thus, music impairs hearing of orchestral musicians, but less than expected from noise exposure

Evaluation of Sound Exposure and Risk of Hearing Impairment in Orchestral Musicians

This study aimed to assess exposure to sound and the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in orchestral musicians. Sound pressure level was measured in 1 opera and 3 symphony orchestras; questionnaires were filled in. On the basis of that data, the risk of NIHL was assessed according to Standard No. ISO 1999:1990. Classical orchestral musicians are usually exposed to sound at equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure levels of 81−90 dB (10th−90th percentiles), for 20−45 h (10th−90th percentiles) per week. Occupational exposure to such sound levels over 40 years of employment might cause hearing loss (expressed as a mean hearing threshold level at 2, 3, 4 kHz exceeding 35 dB) of up to 26%. Playing the horn, trumpet, tuba and percussion carries the highest risk (over 20%)

Hearing Ability in Orchestral Musicians

Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) were determined in 57 classical orchestral musicians along with a questionnaire inquiry using a modified Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap ((m)AIADH). Data on musicians’ working experience and sound pressure levels produced by various groups of instruments were also collected. Measured hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with the theoretical predictions calculated according to ISO 1999:1990. High frequency notched audiograms typical for noise-induced hearing loss were found in 28% of the subjects. PTA and TEOAE consistently showed a tendency toward better hearing in females vs. males, younger vs. older subjects, and lower- vs. higher-exposed to orchestral noise subjects. Audiometric HTLs were better than theoretical predictions in the frequency range of 2000–4000 Hz. The (m)AIADH scores indicated some hearing difficulties in relation to intelligibility in noisy environment in 26% of the players. Our results indicated a need to implement a hearing conservation program for this professional group

Self-Assessment of Hearing Status and Risk of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Workers in a Rolling Stock Plant

Noise measurements and questionnaire inquiries were carried out for 124 workers of a rolling stock plant to develop a hearing conservation program. On the basis of that data, the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) was evaluated. Additionally, the workers’ hearing ability was assessed with the (modified) Amsterdam inventory for auditory disability and handicap, (m)AIADH. The workers had been exposed to noise at A-weighted daily noise exposure levels of 74–110 dB for 1-40 years. Almost one third of the workers complained of hearing impairment and the (m)AIADH results showed some hearing difficulties in over half of them. The estimated risk of hearing loss over 25 dB in the frequency range of 3-6 kHz was 41–50% when the standard method of predicting NIHL specified in Standard No. ISO 1999:1990 was used. This risk increased to 50-67% when noise impulsiveness, coexposure to organic solvents, elevated blood pressure and smoking were included in calculations

The Influence of Selected Risk Factors on the Hearing Threshold Level of Noise Exposed Employees

The aim of the study was to evaluate the combined effect of noise exposure and additional risk factors on permanent hearing threshold shift. Three additional risk factors were: exposure to organic solvents, smoking and elevated blood pressure. The data on exposure and health status of employees were collected in 24 factories. The study group comprised of 3741 noise male exposed workers of: mean age 39§8 years, mean tenure 16§7 years and LEX;8h = 86 § 5 dB. For each subject, hearing level was measured with pure tone audiometry, blood pressure and noise exposure were assessed from the records of local occupational health care and obligatory noise measurements performed by employers. Smoking and solvent exposure were assessed with questionnaire. The study group was divided into subgroups with respect to the considered risk factors. In the analysis, the distribution of hearing level of each subgroup was compared to the predicted one which the standard calculation method described in ISO 1999:1990. For each of the considered risk factors, the difference between measured and calculated hearing level distribution was used to establish, by the least square method, a noise dose related correction square function for the standard method. The considered risk factors: solvent exposure, smoking and elevated blood pressure combined with noise exposure, may increase degree of hearing loss

Annoyance Related to Wind Turbine Noise

A questionnaire inquiry on response to wind turbine noise was carried out on 361 subjects living in the vicinity of 8 wind farms. Current mental health status of respondents was assessed using Goldberg General Health Questionnaire GHQ-12. For areas where respondents lived, A-weighted sound pressure levels (SPLs) were calculated as the sum of the contributions from the wind power plants in the specific area. Generally, 33.0% of respondents were annoyed outdoors by wind turbine noise at the calculated A-weighted SPL of 31–50 dB, while indoors the noise was annoying to 21.3% of them. The propor- tion of subjects evaluating the noise produced by operative wind turbines as annoying decreased with increasing the distance from the nearest wind turbine (27.6% at the distance of 400–800 m vs 14.3% at the distance above 800 m, p < 0.016). On the other hand, the higher was the noise level, the greater was the percentage of annoyed respondents (14.0% at SPL up to 40 dB vs 28.1% at SPL of 40–45 dB, p < 0.016). Besides noise and distance categories, subjective factors, such as general attitude to wind turbines, sensitivity to landscape littering and current mental health status, were found to have significant impact on the perceived annoyance. About 50% of variance in annoyance rating might be explained by the aforesaid subjective factors