MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070874431 · doi:10.1121/1.3488307

Wideband characterization of the complex wave number and characteristic impedance of sound absorbers

2010· article· en· W2070874431 on OpenAlexaff
Yacoubou Salissou, Raymond Panneton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWidebandAcousticsMicrophoneComputer scienceElectrical impedanceMaterials sciencePhysicsOpticsLoudspeaker

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several methods for measuring the complex wave number and the characteristic impedance of sound absorbers have been proposed in the literature. These methods can be classified into single frequency and wideband methods. In this paper, the main existing methods are revisited and discussed. An alternative method which is not well known or discussed in the literature while exhibiting great potential is also discussed. This method is essentially an improvement of the wideband method described by Iwase et al., rewritten so that the setup is more ISO 10534-2 standard-compliant. Glass wool, melamine foam and acoustical/thermal insulator wool are used to compare the main existing wideband non-iterative methods with this alternative method. It is found that, in the middle and high frequency ranges the alternative method yields results that are comparable in accuracy to the classical two-cavity method and the four-microphone transfer-matrix method. However, in the low frequency range, the alternative method appears to be more accurate than the other methods, especially when measuring the complex wave number.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations62
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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