MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083166694 · doi:10.1121/1.4743317

Evolutionary strategy algorithm for a complete characterization of porous materials using a standing wave tube

2000· article· en· W2083166694 on OpenAlexaff
Youssef Atalla, Raymond Panneton, Franck Sgard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortuosityEvolutionary algorithmA priori and a posterioriAlgorithmInverse problemComputer sciencePorous mediumPorosityCharacterization (materials science)MathematicsMaterials scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematical analysisOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A widely used model for describing the attenuation of an acoustical wave propagating in a rigid open-cell porous material is the Johnson–Champoux–Allard (JCA) model. This model is based on five macroscopic parameters describing the porous medium: flow resistivity, porosity, tortuosity, viscous and thermal characteristic lengths. Simultaneously with the development of direct methods for measuring these five parameters, defining and solving inverse problems based on an artificial intelligence approach appears to overcome some of the limitations of the direct methods. In this work, an application of the evolutionary strategy (ES) algorithm for the estimation of the five parameters of a porous material from simple acoustical measurements is presented. First, a number of numerical tests are performed and the results are used like a priori knowledge of how to set up an evolutionary algorithm to solve such a difficult problem in the shortest time. In the second step, the final setup of the evolutionary algorithm is applied for evaluation of the five parameters from experimental measurements. The method seems practical and promising since it is based on simple acoustical measurements and avoids using complicated and unreliable measurement setups.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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