Angular scattering of sound from solid particles in turbulent suspension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sound scattering by solid particles suspended in a turbulent jet is investigated. Measurements of the scattered amplitude were made in a bistatic geometry at frequencies between 1.5 and 4.0 MHz, and at scattering angles from 95 degrees to 165 degrees relative to the forward direction. Two types of particle were used: nearly spherical lead-glass beads and aspherical natural sand grains. For each particle type, experiments were carried out using approximately 200 and approximately 500 microm median diameter grain sizes, corresponding to 0.7 < or approximately ka < or approximately 4. The sphericity of the sand grains, defined as the ratio of projected perimeter size to projected area size, was 1.08. The lead-glass bead results are consistent with an elastic sphere model. A rigid movable sphere model provides the best fit to the sand data, and the best-fit diameter is within 4% of the equivalent volume size. However, the scattering pattern for sand is systematically smoother than predicted: that is, the undulations in the angular scattering pattern predicted by spherical scatterer theory are present, but muted. This observed departure from spherical scatterer theory is attributed to disruption of the interference among creeping waves by the irregular surfaces of natural sand grains.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".