MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118216704 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2000.922652

Finite element determination of the absolute magnitude of an ultrasonic pulse produced by an EMAT

2002· article· en· W2118216704 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Jafari, Anthony N. Sinclair, A. Konrad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic acoustic transducerAcousticsFinite element methodElectromagnetic coilUltrasonic sensorCurrent densityTransducerMaterials scienceCurrent (fluid)ConductorPulse (music)Electrical conductorPhysicsOpticsUltrasonic testingComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic acoustic transducers or EMATs for short, are investigated in transmitting mode for nonferromagnetic conducting materials. Two different finite element (FE) formulations, derived from different definitions of source current density, are compared. A differential equation based on an incomplete equation for the source current density is solved analytically for the magnetic vector potential (MVP). To validate the FE results, one-dimensional (1D) analytical solutions are used. An EMAT example containing six source conductors is also modeled. The FE results are compared with results obtained from existing methods for two EMAT meander coil conductor sizes. The results show the importance of using the complete equation for the source current density in the modeling of EMATs, in order to properly account for skin and proximity effects.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207