MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067278222 · doi:10.1121/1.4743465

Model-based method for improvements in the calibration of ultrasonic power measurements at low-power levels

2000· article· en· W2067278222 on OpenAlexaff
Lixue Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrasonic sensorCalibrationPower (physics)AcousticsCoaxialVoltageTransducerSIGNAL (programming language)ReproducibilityComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The measurement uncertainty in the calibration of ultrasonic power measurements at low-power levels was reduced by a model-based signal-processing method. The ultrasonic power measurement system is based on the radiation force balance method according to IEC 61161. Outputs of an electronic balance and the excitation voltage were simultaneously sampled and recorded. A computer-controlled coaxial switch that utilizes data lines of the parallel port of a desktop computer was used for power-on and power-off control. Power-on and power-off intervals were finely controlled by the desktop computer. The Electroacoustic radiation conductance, defined as the ratio of the ultrasonic power of a transducer and the square of the rf voltage at its input, was calculated from the recorded data. During data processing, a simple model for drifting and switching was proposed and a least-mean-squares algorithm was used to estimate parameters of the model. Good measurement reproducibility was also observed that resulted in the reduction of total measurement uncertainty.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207