MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001644046 · doi:10.1063/1.4798575

Thermal-wave fields in solid wedges using the Green function method: Theory and experiment

2013· article· en· W2001644046 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Tai, Jie Zhang, Chinhua Wang, Andreas Mandelis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermography and Photoacoustic Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWedge (geometry)ThermalAmplitudeOpticsGreen's functionRADIUSMaterials scienceField (mathematics)PhysicsComputational physicsFunction (biology)ThermodynamicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we establish a theoretical model for a cylindrical rod of radius R with opening angle θ illuminated by a modulated incident beam. The model uses the Green function method in cylindrical coordinates. An analytical expression for the Green function and thermal-wave field in such a solid is presented. The theory is validated in the limit of reducing the arbitrary wedge geometrical structure to simpler geometries. For acute angle wedges, it is shown that the thermal-wave field near the edge exhibits confinement behavior and increased amplitude compared to a flat (reference) solid with θ = π. For obtuse angle wedges, it is shown that the opposite is true and relaxation of confinement occurs leading to lower amplitude thermal-wave fields. The theory provides a basis for quantitative thermophysical characterization of wedge-shaped objects and it is tested using an AISI 304 steel wedge and photothermal radiometry detection.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicThermography and Photoacoustic TechniquesFrench-language works237,207