MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067659598 · doi:10.13034/cysj-2014-005

Colliding Coupled Harmonic Oscillators: Ideal vs. Real

2014· article· en· W2067659598 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omer Granek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Science and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimensionless quantityIdeal (ethics)Harmonic oscillatorPendulumPhysicsCoupling (piping)Dimension (graph theory)HarmonicPiecewiseClassical mechanicsMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Mathematical analysisTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsEngineeringCombinatoricsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In various physical systems, harmonic oscillators mutually interact continuously and collide peri­odically in the same dimension. Previous authors have described such scenario of colliding coupled harmonic oscillators, though a simplistic version has yet to be considered. I obtain this version here by developing a general model for a "New­ton's Cradle" made of spherical pendulum-oscil­lators colliding in one dimension with Hertzian behavior, with Hookean springs coupling them to­gether in the same dimension. The model consid­ers damped and undamped apparatuses. I then propose an idealized theory (one that adheres to textbook characteristics of a cradle) for the two-oscillator case, and compare the two numerically to conclude whether it is possible to use an ideal­ized description while maintaining high accuracy in prediction. The theory depicts the ideal system as piecewise, as the new oscillations are com­bined from the original coupled harmonic oscilla­tions. It is based upon an introduction of complex dimensionless factors to the original solutions of the collision less system and a linear combination between the real parts of the resultant products. I found that the idealized theory is roughly accu­rate with respect to the general model up till seven collisions, after which it supplies unreliable predic­tions. Dans divers systèmes physiques, des oscillateurs harmoniques réagissent réciproquement et con­tinuellement, se heurtant périodiquement dans la même dimension. Des auteurs antécédents avaient décrit un tel scénario d’un raccordement des oscil­lateurs harmoniques qui se heurtent, cependant une version plus simple n’avait pas encore été étudiée. J’obtiens cette version-ci en développant un modèle général d’un « berceau de Newton » fait des pendules-oscillateurs sphériques se heurtant dans une dimension avec un comportement hertz, muni des ressorts « Hooke » qui les raccorde dans la même dimension. Ce modèle considère des ap­pareils bouchés tout comme des appareils non-bouchés. Puis, je propose une théorie idéalisée (celle qui correspond aux critères traditionnels d’un berceau) pour le coffre duo-oscillateur. Je compare numériquement un avec l’autre afin de déterminer si c’est possible de se servir d’une description idé­alisée tout en conservant une prédiction de préci­sion. La théorie représente un système idéal fait des pièces, puisque les nouvelles oscillations sont faites de celles de l’original puis jointes avec des oscillations harmoniques. Ce système est envisa­gé sur l’introduction des facteurs complexes sans dimension à des solutions déjà existantes d’un sys­tème qui ne se heurte pas, puis lié à une combinai­son linéaire entre des parties réelles des produits résultants. J’ai trouvé que la théorie idéalisée est à peu près précise en ce qui concerne le modèle gé­néral jusqu’aux sept collisions, puis les prédictions deviennent de moins en moins exactes.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student Science and TechnologySame topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207