Time-domain simulation of the bowed cello string: Dual-polarization effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A detailed time-domain simulation is implemented to model the bowed cello string. Building on earlier simulation models, several new features have been added to make the model more realistic: in particular, both polarizations of the string motion are included, as well as the longitudinal vibrations of the bow hair. These additional features can be turned on and off in the model to evaluate their relative importance. In all previous simulations, the bow-hair was assumed stiff enough to suppress any motion of the string perpendicular to the bowing direction. High-speed video recordings, on the contrary, have suggested that the amplitude of this motion is not negligible compared to the motion of the string in the bowing direction. The major source of this motion is tracked down to the X-Y coupling through the bridge. Although this extra dimension of vibration may not necessarily contribute much to the radiated sound by itself, it can modulate the effective bow force and hence affect the stick-slip motion of the string. The longitudinal vibration of the bowhair is also included in our model. The compliance of the bow-hair was accounted for in previous studies in a crude way, but without enough detail to capture the difference between different bows.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".