MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047159721 · doi:10.1121/1.2261244

On the modeling of sound radiation from poroelastic materials

2006· article· en· W2047159721 on OpenAlexaff
Noureddine Atalla, Franck Sgard, Celse K. Amédin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoromechanicsBiot numberPorous mediumFinite element methodSound transmission classAcousticsStructural acousticsMaterials scienceMechanicsRadiation impedanceRadiationPorosityPhysicsOpticsVibrationComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical approaches based on finite element discretizations of Biot’s poroelasticity equations provide efficient tools to solve problems where the porous material is coupled to elastic structures and finite extent acoustic cavities. Sometimes, it may be relevant to evaluate the radiation of a poroelastic material into an infinite fluid medium. Examples include (i) the evaluation of the diffuse field sound absorption coefficient of a porous material and/or the sound transmission loss of an elastic plate coupled to a porous sheet, (ii) the assessment of the acoustic radiation damping of a porous material coupled to a vibrating structure. The latter is particularly important for the correct experimental characterization of the intrinsic damping of the material’s frame. Up to now, the acoustic radiation of a porous medium into an unbounded fluid medium has usually been neglected. The classical approaches for modeling free field radiation of porous materials (i) assumes the interstitial pressure at the radiation surface to be zero or (ii) fixes the radiation impedance to an approximate value. This paper discusses the limitations of these assumptions and presents a numerical formulation for evaluating the sound radiation of baffled poroelastic media including fluid loading effects. The problem is solved using a mixed FEM-BEM approach where the fluid loading is accounted for using an admittance matrix. Both numerical examples and a transmission loss test are presented to illustrate the performance of the technique and its applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations41
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207