MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077585075 · doi:10.1177/1045389x14541500

Research of a new sensor method for predicting arbitrary waves through structural configuration analysis

2014· article· en· W2077585075 on OpenAlexaff
Biaobiao Zhang, Shudong Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTikhonov regularizationRegularization (linguistics)Inverse problemAcousticsWaveformAmplitudeComputer scienceMathematical analysisMathematicsPhysicsOpticsArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, based on our understanding of sinusoidal acoustic wave loads identification on the beam foundation acoustic sensor, we extend a new approach to identify arbitrary waves of different amplitudes and waveforms. Since in our new cases study, due to the complexity of moving arbitrary wave loads, the conventional Tikhonov combined with the L -curve method is not an effective way to find the suitable regularization parameter used for wave inverse solutions, we use the Arnoldi–Tikhonov regularization method coupled with the generalized cross validation for seeking regularization parameters; this method proved to be better to find the regularization parameter than the L-curve method. In addition, we study displacement response sensitivities of sensor design parameters, such as geometries of the sensor to optimize the design of the sensor. Meanwhile, we also design a sandwich composite beam sensor to replace the structure with traditional materials, and wave reconstruction results are surprisingly good, even in background noise interference level as high as 20%. Therefore, the performance of the new sensor model is enhanced.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, 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 Intelligent Material Systems and StructuresSame topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207