An index to quantify the through-thickness symmetry of sound absorbing materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, an extension of the theoretical formulation of the transfer matrix to non symmetrical sound absorbing porous materials is carried out. From this extension, an index of asymmetry is proposed and discussed. This index allows one to quantify the through-thickness asymmetry of a sound absorbing porous material. This index may be used for quality control or to assess the symmetry of the material in terms of its acoustic properties (absorption, reflection, impedance, propagation constant). To validate the application of the index of asymmetry, samples made up from two layers of porous materials are studied. Each so-constructed two-layered sample is seen as an equivalent asymmetrical single porous layer with a sudden change in its physical properties. The acoustic properties of each sample are then measured in the direct and inverted configurations (i.e., when both sides of the sample are facing successively the incident wave). Their values are compared in terms of the asymmetry index of the equivalent single layer. From these tests, an index value is suggested. Above this value, the acoustic properties of a sound absorbing material should be considered as being not symmetrical.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".