MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142123733 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.2011.6032971

A time-domain derivation of the telegraph equation to describe sound propagation in rigid tubes

2011· article· en· W2142123733 on OpenAlexaff
Bernie C. Till, Peter F. Driessen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelegrapher's equationsPhysicsConstant (computer programming)DissipationSecond soundWaveformMathematical analysisHeat equationWave equationLossless compressionA priori and a posterioriBoundary value problemDiffusion equationClassical mechanicsMechanicsMathematicsTransmission lineAcousticsComputer scienceVoltageSound (geography)TelecommunicationsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting from first principles, we describe the propagation of sound waves in rigid tubes using a simple approach that derives a telegraph equation with frequency-independent parameters from the lossless wave equation by relaxing one assumption: that the dynamical variables are constant over the entire cross-sectional area of the tube. We do this by introducing a relatively narrow boundary layer at the wall of the tube, over which the dynamical variables decrease linearly to zero. This allows us to make very simple corrections to the lossless case, and to express them in terms of two unorthodox parameters, the viscous diffusion time constant and the thermal diffusion time constant. A comparison with the telegraph equation for the electrical transmission line establishes precise relationships between the electrical circuit elements and the physical properties of the fluid, which are thus proven a posteriori rather than asserted a priori. We thus arrive at an instructive and useful derivation of the acoustic telegraph equation, which takes viscous damping and thermal dissipation into account but does not resort to the combined heavy machinery of fluid dynamics and thermodynamics, does not assume that the waveforms are sinusoidal, and does not assume any particular cross sectional shape of the tube. The approach is novel in that a comparable treatment appears neither in the standard physics and acoustics texts nor in the literature.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207