Read the Spanish edition as a Spanish acoustics engineer would - #511
Merged
Conversation
Two waves rewrote the Spanish pages in a hurry, page for page against the English, and a parity pass confirmed they carry the same sections, figures and numbers. That is not the same as reading like Spanish. This is the pass that was missing: 143 pages read against their English twins, 265 changes from the area reviewers, and 71 terms the corpus used inconsistently with itself settled once and applied everywhere, about 1850 occurrences across 159 files. The terms were decided by authority, not by taste. The Spanish adoption of the standard the term belongs to comes first, and it outranks the corpus's own majority: `apartado` for a clause, `trayectoria` for an EN 12354 transmission path, `nivel de evaluación` for a rating level, `índice de reducción vibratoria`, `presión acústica`, `OACI`. Where the standard splits a word, so do we: `probeta` for a material sample and `elemento de ensayo` for a building element are different things and ISO 10140 keeps them apart. Spanish acoustics literature settles what no standard covers: `sonio` for the unit, `divergencia` for geometric spreading, `«…»` for quotation marks. Eleven terms were left alone, most of them two concepts wearing one word. Some of what this found is not register at all. `weighting.mdx` had inverted the subject and object of a sentence, asserting the opposite of its own section 5. `intensity.mdx` had flattened an English causative into a plain active, making an annex perform an evaluation rather than require one, and had strengthened an "asks for" into a demand: modal drift in normative text, which is the difference between guidance and requirement. Two design pages printed untranslated client and specimen strings onto the rendered Spanish PDF. The aircraft pages said `molestia percibida` where the official Spanish ICAO Annex 16 says `ruidosidad percibida` 36 times and `molestia` never, and `molestia` is this corpus's word for a different quantity with its own page. The sweep also caught itself: replacing ICAO with OACI had reached two rows of the transplanted conformance body, which `make site-reports` would have reverted and CI would have failed on. Both restored. The full CI set passes locally, the eleven site steps included.
|
You've reached the fair usage limit for the Bito Code Review Agent trial. Upgrade to a paid plan or contact support@bito.in for assistance. Learn more |
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry @jmrplens, your pull request is larger than the review limit of 150000 diff characters
|
You've reached the fair usage limit for the Bito Code Review Agent trial. Upgrade to a paid plan or contact support@bito.in for assistance. Learn more |
github-actions
Bot
added
site
|
Important Review skippedToo many files! This PR contains 158 files, which is 58 over the limit of 100. To get a review, reduce the PR to 100 files or fewer by splitting it into smaller PRs or changing its base branch. Upgrade to a paid plan to raise the limit. ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (158)
You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Reviewer's GuideSpanish acoustics review pass: align Spanish terminology, register, and normative references with Spanish standards and literature, fix technical phrasing and UI wording, and normalize key terms (e.g. trayectoria vs camino, ruidosidad percibida vs molestia percibida, sonios, valoración vs calificación, capas elásticas vs resilientes) across many guides and reference pages, including underwater propagation/solvers, perception theory, building design/insulation, room noise, metadiffusers, human vibration, intensity, loudness, glossary, and start pages. File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #511 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.05% 97.05%
=======================================
Files 295 295
Lines 39146 39146
=======================================
Hits 37992 37992
Misses 1154 1154 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Contributor
Numerical conformance report✅ 533/533 conformance checks pass across 57 domains and 362 standards - filters class 1 - weightings within IEC 61672-1 class 1. Each row pins a standard clause to its expected normative value and the value the library computes. Every section below is collapsible and stays collapsed while all of its rows pass; a section with any failing row opens automatically. ✅ Numerical validation - filters & weightings: class showcase (IEC 61260-1 · IEC 61672-1 · ISO 7196)IEC 61260-1:2014 class per filter architecture (order 6, one-third-octave, 100 Hz-10 kHz, fs = 48 kHz). For each architecture the table shows, at its binding band, the measured relative attenuation and the class-1 limit it must clear, so the number and the range it must sit in are both visible. A positive margin means the acceptance limits are met with that much room.
Only Butterworth (the library default) and Chebyshev-II are class-compliant architectures. Chebyshev-I and elliptic trade the mask for passband ripple, and Bessel for a maximally-flat group delay (soft rolloff); they cannot satisfy the IEC 61260-1 Class 1/2 attenuation mask by construction, so they are labelled By design - this is expected, not a failure or regression. Frequency-weighting conformance (A/C: IEC 61672-1 Table 3; G: ISO 7196 A.3). The max deviation from nominal is informational (it falls at a frequency extreme where the tolerance is widest and asymmetric); compliance is judged at the binding frequency - the one with the least headroom - where the deviation, the applicable tolerance band and the headroom are shown together.
✅ Filters & weightings: 100% (10/10)
✅ Levels & dosimetry: 100% (9/9)
✅ Room & building acoustics: 100% (72/72)
✅ Room acoustics: 100% (16/16)
✅ Psychoacoustics: 100% (14/14)
✅ Speech transmission (IEC 60268-16): 100% (10/10)
✅ System measurement (Golay / Kirkeby / Mueller-Massarani): 100% (5/5)
✅ Intensity & sound power: 100% (10/10)
✅ Building prediction & uncertainty: 100% (15/15)
✅ Outdoor propagation & occupational exposure: 100% (10/10)
✅ Materials: absorption, airflow & impedance: 100% (6/6)
✅ Scattering & diffusion (ISO 17497): 100% (14/14)
✅ In-situ road absorption (ISO 13472): 100% (3/3)
✅ Precision sound power (ISO 3745 / 9614-3): 100% (4/4)
✅ Human vibration (ISO 8041 / 2631 / 5349): 100% (15/15)
✅ Speech intelligibility (ANSI S3.5-1997): 100% (24/24)
✅ Objective intelligibility (STOI / ESTOI): 100% (3/3)
✅ Impulsive-sound prominence (NT ACOU 112): 100% (2/2)
✅ Impulsive-sound prominence (ISO/PAS 1996-3): 100% (2/2)
✅ Room noise (ANSI S12.2-2019): 100% (3/3)
✅ Hearing threshold (ISO 7029 / ISO 389-7): 100% (3/3)
✅ Measurement uncertainty (GUM / Supplement 1): 100% (7/7)
✅ Noise-induced hearing loss (ISO 1999): 100% (6/6)
✅ Multiple-shock whole-body vibration (ISO 2631-5): 100% (6/6)
✅ Sound absorption in enclosed spaces (EN 12354-6): 100% (2/2)
✅ Prominent discrete tones (ECMA-418-1): 100% (2/2)
✅ Tonal audibility (ISO/PAS 20065): 100% (11/11)
✅ Psychoacoustic annoyance & fluctuation strength (Fastl & Zwicker): 100% (3/3)
✅ Electroacoustics: distortion & frequency response: 100% (20/20)
✅ Calibrated spectral analysis (Bendat & Piersol): 100% (12/12)
✅ Multiple-input coherence (Bendat & Piersol): 100% (5/5)
✅ Time-frequency analysis (Bendat & Piersol): 100% (3/3)
✅ Correlation, time delay and envelope (B&P / Knapp & Carter): 100% (7/7)
✅ Cepstrum, liftering and envelope spectrum (Havelock / B&P): 100% (3/3)
✅ Time synchronous averaging (McFadden 1987): 100% (5/5)
✅ Data qualification and Rice statistics (Bendat & Piersol): 100% (8/8)
✅ Underwater acoustics (ISO 18405/17208/18406): 100% (6/6)
✅ Underwater sound propagation (transmission loss): 100% (16/16)
✅ Underwater propagation regimes (Weston flux theory): 100% (3/3)
✅ Marine-mammal auditory weighting (NMFS / Southall): 100% (4/4)
✅ Underwater numerical propagation (modes / rays / PE): 100% (4/4)
✅ Aircraft noise (ICAO Annex 16 / IEC 61265): 100% (15/15)
✅ Rotorcraft noise (ECAC Doc 32 / NORAH2): 100% (12/12)
✅ CNOSSOS-EU road source (Directive 2002/49/EC Annex II): 100% (6/6)
✅ Wind-turbine noise (IEC 61400-11): 100% (3/3)
✅ Porous & multilayer absorbers (Mechel / Bies / Cox & D'Antonio): 100% (20/20)
✅ Slow-sound perfect absorbers (Jimenez et al. Appl. Sci. 2017): 100% (3/3)
✅ Program loudness (ITU-R BS.1770 / EBU R 128): 100% (8/8)
✅ 2D FDTD wave simulation (Attenborough & Van Renterghem 2021, Ch. 4): 100% (4/4)
✅ Swept-sine distortion & phase utilities (Farina / Novak): 100% (7/7)
✅ Spherical ground & barriers (Attenborough / Salomons / Bies): 100% (7/7)
✅ Panel & aperture sound insulation (Bies / Hopkins / Cremer): 100% (17/17)
✅ Bending-wave plate-junction transmission (Cremer / Craik / Hopkins): 100% (6/6)
✅ Atmospheric refraction (Salomons rays / GFPE): 100% (3/3)
✅ Electroacoustics: 100% (9/9)
✅ Industrial noise control: 100% (22/22)
✅ CNOSSOS-EU railway source (Directive 2002/49/EC Annex II): 100% (8/8)
Tests & coverage — 48204 tests, 0 failures (✅ all green)
Conformance harness: |
The sweep ranked its authorities: the Spanish adoption of the standard first, Spanish literature second, and the corpus's own majority third. The first two hold. The third does not measure Spanish, it measures what earlier translators wrote, and a count printed beside it makes that look like evidence. Forty-three terms had been settled that way. Re-checked against sources outside this repository, five are overturned, one turns out not to want a term at all, seventeen are confirmed, three are recorded as genuine splits, and eleven are left unsettled because nothing external covers them. Those eleven keep whatever the corpus already says, which is the honest outcome when there is no evidence, and they are marked so nobody re-decides them on a count. What moved, and on what: `solucionador` is gone, and nothing replaces it. In twenty-two UNE adoptions, twelve Spanish books and 7,464 documents of the Sociedad Española de Acústica the word appears once, inside a bilingual translation whose English column reads "iterative resolvers". Spanish either keeps the English word, writes `resolvedor`, or does what this branch now does and names the method: the FDTD method, normal modes, ray tracing, the parabolic equation. 139 sentences recast across 30 pages. `hoja de datos` becomes `hoja de características`, which Malvino and Bates writes 238 times and UNE-EN 60268-5 pairs with `hoja de especificaciones`. The `ficha técnica` this nearly became turns out, on reading the seven hits rather than counting them, to name a one-page hall summary: it corroborates `ficha` as this project's word for a report fiche and argues against reusing it. `cepstro` becomes `cepstrum`, which is not a preference: `cepstro` scores zero across those 7,464 documents. `senoide` becomes `sinusoide`, which the dictionary does not even list against 210 to 25 in the textbooks. `presupuesto de incertidumbre` becomes `balance de incertidumbre`, the title of Table D.2 of UNE-EN ISO 3746 where the English reads "uncertainty budget". `integración hacia atrás` becomes `integración inversa`, on Carrión, the Brüel & Kjær analyser manual and three Acústica 2012 papers. Two rows are left deliberately alone and said so. Display gain has one external source and one is below the bar, so nothing moved even though that source contradicts us. Tone burst is a real split: the standard translates it and the congresses keep the English. One row of the sweep is struck rather than kept: it cited two UNE adoptions that are not in this repository and were never read.
|
|
You've reached the fair usage limit for the Bito Code Review Agent trial. Upgrade to a paid plan or contact support@bito.in for assistance. Learn more |
1 similar comment
|
You've reached the fair usage limit for the Bito Code Review Agent trial. Upgrade to a paid plan or contact support@bito.in for assistance. Learn more |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two waves rewrote the Spanish pages against the English, page for page, and a parity pass confirmed they carry the same sections, figures, snippets and numbers. That is a different thing from reading like Spanish, and this is the pass that was missing.
143 pages read against their English twins. 265 changes from the area reviewers, and 71 terms the corpus used inconsistently with itself settled once and applied everywhere: about 1850 occurrences across 159 files. Eleven terms were deliberately left alone.
Terms were decided by authority, not by taste
The order was fixed before any of it started, and it matters that the standard outranks the corpus's own majority rather than the other way round:
apartadofor a clause,trayectoriafor an EN 12354 transmission path,nivel de evaluaciónfor a rating level (UNE-ISO 1996-1 clause 3.3.2 defines it and uses it 26 times, with zero uses of the word the page had),índice de reducción vibratoria,presión acústica,OACI. Where the standard splits a word, so do we:probetais a material sample andelemento de ensayois a building element, and ISO 10140 keeps them apart.soniofor the unit,divergenciafor geometric spreading,«…»for quotation marks.Some of this is not register at all
signals/levels/weighting.mdxhad inverted the subject and object of a sentence, asserting the opposite of what its own section 5 says.devices/emission/intensity.mdxhad flattened an English causative into a plain active, making an annex perform an evaluation rather than require one, and had strengthened an "asks for" into a demand. Modal drift in a normative page is the difference between guidance and a requirement.language="es"to a report fiche while still carrying English client, specimen and test-room strings, which print onto the rendered Spanish PDF.molestia percibida. The official Spanish ICAO Annex 16 Vol I saysruidosidad percibida36 times andmolestianever, andmolestiais this corpus's word for annoyance, a different quantity with a page of its own.desviación estándarwhere four UNE standards writedesviación típica62 times between them and none writes the other.The sweep caught itself
Replacing ICAO with OACI reached two rows of the conformance body, which is transplanted verbatim from
docs/CONFORMANCE.md.make site-reportswould have reverted them and CI would have failed on the drift. Both restored, and the generator now reports zero pages written.Checks
The full CI set was run locally against this branch, the eleven site steps included: build, HTML validation, KaTeX, accessibility, sidebar and the visual audit. Twenty five of twenty five.
Summary by Sourcery
Align Spanish technical terminology, phrasing, and documentation with acoustics standards and domain usage, and correct several content and wording issues across building acoustics, underwater acoustics, perception, vibration, materials, and aircraft guides.
Enhancements:
Documentation: