Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smart foams combine the complimentary advantages of passive foam material and spatially distributed piezoelectric actuator embedded in it for active noise control applications. In this paper, the problem of improving the transmission loss of smart foams using active control strategies has been investigated both numerically and experimentally inside a waveguide under the condition of plane wave propagation. The finite element simulation of a coupled noise control system has been undertaken with three different smart foam designs and their effectiveness in cancelling the transmitted wave downstream of the smart foam have been studied. The simulation results provide insight into the physical phenomenon of active noise cancellation and explain the impact of the smart foam designs on the optimal active control results. Experimental studies aimed at implementing the real-time control for transmission loss optimization have been performed using the classical single input/single output filtered-reference least mean squares algorithm. The active control results with broadband and single frequency primary source inputs demonstrate a good improvement in the transmission loss of the smart foams. The study gives a comparative description of the transmission and absorption control problems in light of the modification of the vibration response of the piezoelectric actuator under active control.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".